Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
What Do You Think 'true' Reality...

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Bruce on September 27, 2003 01:02:51 UTC

means? Whats true and real is strictly observer dependent. Its obvious that it varies from observer to observer. Stafford wants to show that it isn't observer dependent. That it is a set of numbers. For Tourist it is a set of bananas [I'm sure Tourist doesn't believe this]. For me it is observer dependent and relative. All Stafford's machinations are meaningless wrt his claim that he derives both QM and GR from what you are still trying to understand. Believe me if it is that hard to grasp it is useless for doing physics. He made one prediction after I asked him numerous times to do just that. He predicted Newton had elliptical orbits exactly correct while claiming that he derived GR from 'whatever'. This means he doesn't even know the difference between the Newton and Einstein prediction. Its obvious [to me] that he is just a Newtonian hanging onto his background of absolute space and time.

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins