EPR Paradox - 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

EPR Paradox

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Richard Ruquist on April 5, 2001 16:47:16 UTC

was a situation where for some unobserved effects, either GR or QM was correct. That issue is now resolved by experiment. QM is correct and GR is false, for the particular effects under consideration.

So it is not only possible. It has happened.

Yet GR is still considered a law of nature.

Follow Ups:

False Laws of Nature? - doctordick - April 5, 2001 - 17:38 UTC
A scientific law may be valid in a large regime, but not all - johnpowell - April 5, 2001 - 21:50 UTC
EPR = Einstein, Padolsky, Rosen? - johnpowell - April 5, 2001 - 22:04 UTC

Additional Information

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

Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2025 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