Changes

Talk:Theory of relativity (view source)

Revision as of 04:01, October 17, 2009

591 bytes added , 04:01, October 17, 2009

relativity has yielded nothing productive, and neither is this discussion.

Line 1,034: Line 1,034:

::::: 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)

+

:::::: I looked at your reference and found nothing relevant to this discussion, and you quoted nothing. In sum, relativity has yielded nothing productive, and neither is this discussion. Every minute spent on discussing relativity is a wasted minute, and every dollar spent is a wasted dollar. Relativity is based entirely on sweeping and implausible assumptions unlike any other theory of physics. Suit yourself if you like relativity, but you're wasting your time and please don't waste any more taxpayer dollars on it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:01, 17 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

126,533

edits