Changes

Talk:Theory of relativity (view source)

Revision as of 17:35, October 15, 2009

850 bytes added , 17:35, October 15, 2009

→‎Quantum Field Theory/Changes to the Intro: reply

Line 902: Line 902:

On a stylistic note, maybe the references to quantum mechanics should be grouped together in their own section, or their own article? Also, perhaps-we should include an "evidence for" section to contrast with the "evidence against"?--[[User:WLink|WLink]] 11:38, 15 October 2009 (EDT)

+

: You've made a number of false assertions here. Newton expressly rejected relying on hypotheses. His physics is based on observation, in contrast with relativity, where mathematics was developed first and then data was sought to support it.

+

: Relativity relies on four-dimensional space; other physics does not. It was widely claimed for years that few could understand relativity, and Eddington even has a famous quotation to that effect.

+

: Quantum Field Theory is incomplete at best and incoherent at worst. Even one of the rare Nobel Prizes for it has an admission of incompleteness in the acceptance speech.

+

: Relativity is a liberal's fantasy, and Obama even supposedly helped with a paper drawing liberal conclusions from it. Too bad it's all assumption and little more.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:35, 15 October 2009 (EDT)

Aschlafly

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

126,521

edits