Path: csiph.com!au2pb.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!nntpswitch.blueworldhosting.com!not-for-mail
Content-Type: Text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Jeff-Relf.Me <@.>
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2015 21:27:11 -0800 (Seattle)
Message-ID: <Jeff-Relf.Me@Dec.3{9.27P.Seattle.2015}>
References: <2646b61c-845d-4b2f-9341-723e0f9560b9@googlegroups.com> <carlip-351E9A.22570122112015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu> <f8619867-2a5c-4b3e-b3c9-3c9606145804@googlegroups.com> <carlip-0A7985.14481427112015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu> <ecc6b9a3-de22-4183-b6e3-3acaf5313d4b@googlegroups.com> <carlip-1A09C1.20583803122015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu>
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: "Energy that can do work" (eXergy) unites GR and QM, no ?
User-Agent: Jeff-Relf.Me/X.ZIP
X-Complaints-To: abuse@blueworldhosting.com
Organization: BWH Usenet NNTPSwitch-Cluster
Lines: 24
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2015 00:27:10 -0500
X-Trace: a0d885661242eec90b8a621705
Xref: csiph.com sci.physics:537313

StevenCarlip replied (to JayMoseley):
> > Come on Steve,  you can do better than that. 
> > Talk about not being serious. Your reply is a joke.
> > I read your paper, Shapiro et al ...
> > Where is there even a mention of how refraction 
> > cant explain the observed data?  [[...]]
> > Is the Ionesphere even a good representation of 
> > the physical constituents of the local vacuum medium. 
> 
> [[...]]  So far, GR has passed all of these tests.  
> What tests has your proposal passed?  
> What future tests could it fail?

JayMoseley rejects Einstein for the same reason
he rejected Darwin... he doesn't like the implications.

Again, StevenCarlip, I ask you:

  General Relativity paints a static, four dimensional timescape.

  Quantum mechanics remains statistical, always;
  i.e. the actual, local causes are unknowable.

  But "energy that can do work" (eXergy) unites them, no ?