Notices
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Understanding Gravity (pseudo)

  1. #1  
    Forum Bachelors Degree Waveman28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    417
    Liongold is very incorrect. General Relativity (which is not even Einsteins, he plagiarised Henri Poincare's paper) is false because it does not admit that everything, including motion is absolute. Quantum mechanics is nothing but a mathematical mess. It decribes nothing about HOW matter acts and reacts with other matter. The mathematics itself is also highly wrong, "renormalisation" is the most laughable aspect of QM, as they think they can just ignore things in order to get the results that fit together with other theories and equations. It has no relation to reality.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope MagiMaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,440
    Would you care to provide some evidence for your claims?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    625
    General Relativity (which is not even Einsteins, he plagiarised Henri Poincare's paper)
    Firstly, it is special relativity that Poincare worked upon; not general as you claim. Secondly, it is true that both delivered the special theory of relativity; Einstein, however, published it a full few weeks before Poincare unveiled it.

    Certainly, I doubt he could have plagiarised it; the two were never in contact.

    Quantum mechanics is nothing but a mathematical mess.
    Yet, for some reason, the computer you type this now is built using quantum mechanical methods to understand the flow of information,. The same is for your DVD, iPod, plasma TV and almost all modern electronic gadgets today.

    It decribes nothing about HOW matter acts and reacts with other matter.
    In QED, photons are absorbed and emitted. That is how the electromagnetic field works, according to quantum mechanics.

    Or do you deny that its astonishing accuracy, which have been experimentally confirmed to over a hundred decimal points, with a very small uncertainty is just a statistical fluke?
    In control lies inordinate freedom; in freedom lies inordinate control.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •