SkipCaptcha
175
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 10:
Line 10: + + + − + − + + Line 22:
Line 26: + Line 28:
Line 33: + Line 34:
Line 40: − − All objections to the faster than light neutrinos at the LHC: Argument has become moot as it is no longer a hasty addition (all comments against the counterexample took objection to the hastiness). Line 41:
Line 45: − POINT − Despite wasting millions of taxpayer dollars searching for gravity waves predicted by the theory, none has ever been found − And, The failure to discover gravitons, despite wasting hundreds of millions in taxpayer money in searching. − Objection- The lack of experimental confirmation so far of gravity waves does NOT falsify the theory. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. − :Response- It is when billions are spent on many years of looking. Surely you wouldn't think a lost item is in your backpack if you spent time looking for it there and could not find it. − − POINT − The acceleration in the expansion of the universe confounds relativity − Objection- Untrue. The EFEs contain a term (a cosmological constant) which accounts for the accelerating expansion. − :Response- Reliance on a cosmological constant has failed before. Line 59:
Line 53: + Line 65:
Line 60: + + +
Debate:Counterexamples to relativity points (view source)
Revision as of 01:44, January 6, 2012
, 01:44, January 6, 2012tidyup and such
:Response C [response to objection A]
:Response C [response to objection A]
Objection B [new objection to the counterexample]
Objection B [new objection to the counterexample]
Points with outstanding objections to the counterexample (currently all on this page)
POINT
POINT
Despite wasting millions of taxpayer dollars searching for gravity waves predicted by the theory, none has ever been found.
Despite wasting millions of taxpayer dollars searching for gravity waves predicted by the theory, none has ever been found.
Objection- The lack of experimental confirmation so far of gravity waves does NOT falsify the theory. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Objection- The lack of experimental confirmation so far of gravity waves does NOT falsify the theory. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Response- It is when billions of dollars are spent looking for it and they aren’t found. If you were looking for a lost item in your backpack and are unable to find it there, you wouldn’t conclude that it could be in your backpack.
:Response- It is when billions of dollars are spent looking for it and they aren’t found. If you were looking for a lost item in your backpack and are unable to find it there, you wouldn’t conclude that it could be in your backpack.
Response: But neither would you conclude that the lost item doesn’t exist, which is what the counterexample is arguing.
::Response- But neither would you conclude that the lost item doesn’t exist, which is what the counterexample is arguing.
POINT
POINT
:Response- Reliance on a cosmological constant has failed before.
:Response- Reliance on a cosmological constant has failed before.
::Response- That doesn’t mean it will always fail. Just because football team A loses a game to football team B does not mean that A will always lose to B.
::Response- That doesn’t mean it will always fail. Just because football team A loses a game to football team B does not mean that A will always lose to B.
POINT
POINT
:Response- Has that been experimentally verified?
:Response- Has that been experimentally verified?
::Response- Yes. E=hf (which allows light, having no mass, to still have energy). This has been experimentally verified, and explains blackbody radiation, the photoelectric effect, and the Compton Effect.
::Response- Yes. E=hf (which allows light, having no mass, to still have energy). This has been experimentally verified, and explains blackbody radiation, the photoelectric effect, and the Compton Effect.
POINT
POINT
Humorous objection- I have a drawer full of socks. I cannot find a match for one. Can I blame relativity?
Humorous objection- I have a drawer full of socks. I cannot find a match for one. Can I blame relativity?
POINT
POINT
Objection- If Creationism is correct, then this point is incorrect as the universe was never small enough for quantum effects to have dominated. Therefore, even though scientists admit the inconsistencies between GR and quantum mechanics, Conservapedia should not allow this point, as it contradicts the Bible. [Perhaps the point could be reworded].
Objection- If Creationism is correct, then this point is incorrect as the universe was never small enough for quantum effects to have dominated. Therefore, even though scientists admit the inconsistencies between GR and quantum mechanics, Conservapedia should not allow this point, as it contradicts the Bible. [Perhaps the point could be reworded].
POINT
POINT
:::Response- QM experiments have shown that a pair of spinning, entangled photons can be separated a great distance, and that the mere observation of the spin of one of those photons immediately removes the uncertainty about the spin of the other photon a far distance away.
:::Response- QM experiments have shown that a pair of spinning, entangled photons can be separated a great distance, and that the mere observation of the spin of one of those photons immediately removes the uncertainty about the spin of the other photon a far distance away.
::::Response- Some people do interpret the observation of one photon as affecting the other photon. But there is no proof of that. You could prove it if the observation transmitted information, but no one has done that .
::::Response- Some people do interpret the observation of one photon as affecting the other photon. But there is no proof of that. You could prove it if the observation transmitted information, but no one has done that .
POINT
POINT
:Response- There are no Counterexamples to the Bible, so this conflict is a serious one.
:Response- There are no Counterexamples to the Bible, so this conflict is a serious one.
Objection- This is usually considered a miracle, and hence a suspension of natural laws.
Objection- This is usually considered a miracle, and hence a suspension of natural laws.
All objections to the faster than light neutrinos at the LHC: Argument has become moot as it is no longer a hasty addition (all comments against the counterexample took objection to the hastiness).