Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
If someone things that Relativity '''''must''''' be true as a matter of logic, then any and all evidence to the contrary is not going to change that view.
Line 1: Line 1:  
<big>'''For a point-by-point summary of this page, see [[Essay - Counterexamples to relativity points]].'''</big>
 
<big>'''For a point-by-point summary of this page, see [[Essay - Counterexamples to relativity points]].'''</big>
−
 
+
<br>
 +
<br>
 
{{articletalkheader|prefix=archive}}
 
{{articletalkheader|prefix=archive}}
   Line 116: Line 117:     
::::: In my opinion, the article is really a list of anomalies and paradoxes, not counterexamples. The anomalies are observations that need some additional explanation, and that may or may not require an adjustment to relativity. The paradoxes seem like contradictions or contrary to common sense, but have explanations. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 00:58, 7 January 2012 (EST)
 
::::: In my opinion, the article is really a list of anomalies and paradoxes, not counterexamples. The anomalies are observations that need some additional explanation, and that may or may not require an adjustment to relativity. The paradoxes seem like contradictions or contrary to common sense, but have explanations. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 00:58, 7 January 2012 (EST)
 +
 +
:::::: If someone things that Relativity '''''must''''' be true as a matter of logic, then any and all evidence to the contrary is not going to change that view.  "Paradox" might be an appropriate term for ostensible contradictions in logic.  But the terms "paradox" and "anomaly" are not suitable for observable science.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:00, 7 January 2012 (EST)
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
126,372

edits

Navigation menu