89
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 171:
Line 171: − + + + +
Essay:Rebuttal to Counterexamples to Relativity (view source)
Revision as of 20:57, February 5, 2012
, 20:57, February 5, 2012#36
:Time isn't a vector. It is a component of the vector space known as "spacetime". Vectors have negatives; the word "inverse" is not typically used here. While there are thermodynamic and other reasons for not allowing time to go backwards in the real world, the mathematics of spacetime allow vectors with any components, even negative ones.
:Time isn't a vector. It is a component of the vector space known as "spacetime". Vectors have negatives; the word "inverse" is not typically used here. While there are thermodynamic and other reasons for not allowing time to go backwards in the real world, the mathematics of spacetime allow vectors with any components, even negative ones.
36:
36:''It is impossible to perform an experiment to determine whether Einstein's theory of relativity is correct, or the older Lorentz aether theory is correct. Believing one over the other is a matter of [[faith]].''
:Modern formulations of the Lorentz aether theory may very well make it completely equivalent to relativity, both special and general. But that doesn't make relativity wrong; it just means that another theory is just as correct. The universal preference of the scientific community for relativity over the Lorentz theory is probably not based on religious faith, but on simplicity, as expressed in [[Occam's razor]]. The Lorentz theory postulates an aether that no experiment can possibly determine the properties of, while relativity postulates no aether.
37:
37: