Changes

:::: Your objections are patently absurd.  Taking your first objection, of course relativity relies entirely on sweeping assumptions, such as claiming that ''v'' can never, ever be faster than ''c'' and that there is no difference in frames of reference anywhere in the universe.  No other area of physics relies so heavily on such far-fetched and unprovable assumptions.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:15, 16 October 2009 (EDT)

:::: Your objections are patently absurd.  Taking your first objection, of course relativity relies entirely on sweeping assumptions, such as claiming that ''v'' can never, ever be faster than ''c'' and that there is no difference in frames of reference anywhere in the universe.  No other area of physics relies so heavily on such far-fetched and unprovable assumptions.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:15, 16 October 2009 (EDT)

::::: That is like complaining that Newtonian physics assumes that energy is conserved. The statement about was observed by Michelson-Morley and others. If you want to call it an assumption, then it was also assumed by [[Newton in 1687|http://www.niu.edu/phil/~kapitan/newton1.shtml]]. Every other theory of science also has similar assumptions, if you want to call these assumptions. Relativity is no different. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 18:38, 16 October 2009 (EDT)

::::: That is like complaining that Newtonian physics assumes that energy is conserved. The statement about was observed by Michelson-Morley and others. If you want to call it an assumption, then it was also assumed by Newton in 1687 [[http://www.niu.edu/phil/~kapitan/newton1.shtml]]. Every other theory of science also has similar assumptions, if you want to call these assumptions. Relativity is no different. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 18:38, 16 October 2009 (EDT)