This Isn't What You Initially Said.. - an Astronomy Net God & Science Forum Message

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


Home \| Discussion Forums \| God and Science \| Post	Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora

This Isn't What You Initially Said..

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Bruce on September 30, 2003 20:16:07 UTC

"It does not really disprove relativity. It just says that some things are not covered by relativity, like entanglment."

Your right it doesn't disprove relativity and the domain of applicability for GR isn't a quantum domain [no kidding]. SR and QM are completely compatible.

Since your changing your horse in midstream who is disengenious now?

Follow Ups:

What about... - harvey1 - September 30, 2003 - 20:54 UTC
- Without going through this convoluted.. - bruce - October 1, 2003 - 20:59 UTC
  - Let me ask a question - harvey1 - October 1, 2003 - 23:53 UTC
    - The mistake in the thought experiment.. - bruce - October 2, 2003 - 02:12 UTC
      - Is it really a mistake? - harvey1 - October 2, 2003 - 14:24 UTC
        
        The other paper - harvey1 - October 2, 2003 - 14:26 UTC
        
        Just exactly why... - bruce - October 2, 2003 - 19:45 UTC
        
        Taking it a step further... - harvey1 - October 2, 2003 - 21:17 UTC
        
        The light minute has everything to do with.. - bruce - October 2, 2003 - 22:30 UTC
        
        Maybe you could clarify? - harvey1 - October 3, 2003 - 02:11 UTC
        
        Actually... - bruce - October 3, 2003 - 04:03 UTC
        
        How about we consider what we know at the two events... - harvey1 - October 3, 2003 - 15:18 UTC
        
        The thought experiment... - bruce - October 3, 2003 - 20:53 UTC
        
        Keep in mind.. - bruce - October 3, 2003 - 20:57 UTC
        
        Isn't SR agnostic about these things? - harvey1 - October 3, 2003 - 22:11 UTC
        
        I have to leave... - bruce - October 4, 2003 - 00:33 UTC
Here is what I initially said - yanniru - October 1, 2003 - 00:16 UTC
- Relativity predicts that information.. - bruce - October 1, 2003 - 20:53 UTC
  - Who cares about information - yanniru - October 1, 2003 - 23:41 UTC
    - Whats wrong with you...? - bruce - October 2, 2003 - 02:24 UTC
      - I am reporting you to the forum host - yanniru - October 2, 2003 - 04:10 UTC
        
        Good for you... - bruce - October 2, 2003 - 04:49 UTC

Additional Information

About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy

Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2024 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