20
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 934:
Line 934: + + + + + + + + + + + +
Talk:Theory of relativity (view source)
Revision as of 23:12, October 15, 2009
, 23:12, October 15, 2009→Quantum Field Theory/Changes to the Intro
:: The progress in quantum field theory has been huge. Who said it was inadequate? If so, I dispute that, and all those Nobel prizes dispute it.
:: The progress in quantum field theory has been huge. Who said it was inadequate? If so, I dispute that, and all those Nobel prizes dispute it.
:: What are the politics of relativity? Maybe you should spell that out. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 18:08, 15 October 2009 (EDT)
:: What are the politics of relativity? Maybe you should spell that out. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 18:08, 15 October 2009 (EDT)
Point 1: Now you are essentially restating the problem of induction- it is a problem with ALL of science, not just relativity. Also, Michelson Morley DOES essentially test the constant speed of light postulate.
Point 2: As I said above, even if we take Newton as a special case, what about quantum mechanics, Electricity and magnetism, etc. All require assumptions! Even if Newton's quote were true, Newtonian science would be the exception, not the rule.
Point 3: Most people consider special and general relativity different, but related theories. They are usually taught in separate courses, and have different domains of usefulness (general relativity being a theory of gravity is used in gravitational problems. Special relativity being a theory of fast moving things is used in particle accelerators).
Point 4- the point about significant digits is not silly- quantum field theory makes the most precise/accurate prediction of any theory of all of science. Further, everyone of those Nobels I listed was given for an aspect of field theory.
As to your last point- reality is what reality is. Whether or not liberals can twist something to fit their ideology is irrelevant.
But, I give up. I wanted to add my expertise as a particle physicist to your educational resource. If you don't want what I have to offer, I have more productive things to do. --[[User:WLink|WLink]] 19:12, 15 October 2009 (EDT)