0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I am unaware of any problem arising from the absence of a fixed background, that is not attributable to human vanity!
Then I propose that we agree to disagree. I do appreciate that you don't want readers to get the wrong impression of scientific theories from posts made by amateurs. This is a problem I also wish to avoid.
Does someone who is challenged or disturbed need grief Ethos?
And also...you talk about 'our' forum here... Can I have a list of 'us', please, just so I'm in the know, like...?
Oh, and while your at it, sorry to put you on the spot, but who do reckon is more intelligent? Alan? Or Jeff?
Can you tell me who these others are please? It's just that I'm now making an assessment of your intelligence, and I'm quite sure I'll find that your own assessment of a persons intelligence will help me...
Quote from: alancalverd on 06/02/2016 17:02:21I am unaware of any problem arising from the absence of a fixed background, that is not attributable to human vanity!Then I propose that we agree to disagree. I do appreciate that you don't want readers to get the wrong impression of scientific theories from posts made by amateurs. This is a problem I also wish to avoid.
Nobody ever proves my idea wrong. So yes I am stuck trying until science proves me wrong on things.
Quote from: Thebox on 06/02/2016 23:50:30Nobody ever proves my idea wrong. So yes I am stuck trying until science proves me wrong on things. It's not incumbent upon us to prove you wrong, the burden of proof lies squarely upon you Mr. Box. As yet, you have shown us nothing but poor math and "your logical" speculation.
Is distance an invariant, is a length of a distance invariant?
Does this mean that it is an act of human vanity to suppose that one might truly understand the universe as an entirety, and be able to chart the universe, as we do our earth, in full detail of knowledge, via a theory of everything?
Because this is indeed what some, around 300, or so I've read, hardcore theoretical physicists are doing where quantum gravity is concerned. By linking quantum to gravity, mass and gravitational field considerations would then indeed give both quantum and relativity an absolute reference frame from which to be equated.
Seems a reasonable enough quest to me Alan... You've surprise me with this comment really... I didn't think that you of all people would be paying any such blind homage to anything at all, let alone the 'church' of relativity....
If your goal is to provide the simplest, most selfconsistent and most accurately predictive hypothesis, it's probably a good idea to start from a relativist rather than an absolutist axiom.
Quote from: timey on 06/02/2016 17:59:18Does this mean that it is an act of human vanity to suppose that one might truly understand the universe as an entirety, and be able to chart the universe, as we do our earth, in full detail of knowledge, via a theory of everything? Yes. But it's not a reason for not trying.QuoteBecause this is indeed what some, around 300, or so I've read, hardcore theoretical physicists are doing where quantum gravity is concerned. By linking quantum to gravity, mass and gravitational field considerations would then indeed give both quantum and relativity an absolute reference frame from which to be equated.Not quite the same thing as a fixed background through which all things move with absolute velocities. QuoteSeems a reasonable enough quest to me Alan... You've surprise me with this comment really... I didn't think that you of all people would be paying any such blind homage to anything at all, let alone the 'church' of relativity.... Not a blind homage, but a realisation that with the successive abolition of anthrocentrism, geocentrism, heliocentrism and the universal aether, our theories have approximated ever closer to observation and our models of the universe have become ever simpler. If your goal is to provide the simplest, most selfconsistent and most accurately predictive hypothesis, it's probably a good idea to start from a relativist rather than an absolutist axiom.
BTW, Alan, it hasn't surprised me in the slightest that nobody has asked if I think I'm more intelligent than you or Jeff.