Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > sci.physics > #593771

Re: QM and GR.

Path csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>
Newsgroups sci.physics.relativity, sci.physics
Subject Re: QM and GR.
Date Fri, 19 Aug 2016 13:05:13 +1000
Lines 28
Message-ID <e1nbb9FbsftU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References <e774f48f-83e5-4a00-bb28-5fe21626b4b3@googlegroups.com> <dvednQ_V3vIC9B_KnZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <nm0dtm$5sb$1@gioia.aioe.org> <dutv5vFo4jqU1@mid.individual.net> <nmtgg6$jb7$2@gioia.aioe.org> <dvlbcsFbs1pU1@mid.individual.net> <nngdvq$nj8$2@gioia.aioe.org>
Mime-Version 1.0
Content-Type text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding 7bit
X-Trace individual.net b+7fl9AKoHrVkH2T1p4Tow1qtMtab0zNuO5+908sn4FouDN8X8
Cancel-Lock sha1:NBkBhzodxEyYHEEau4mOdM11qiw=
User-Agent Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0
In-Reply-To <nngdvq$nj8$2@gioia.aioe.org>
Xref csiph.com sci.physics.relativity:390329 sci.physics:593771

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show key headers only | View raw


On 30/07/2016 6:23 AM, Tsvetana Kasatkina wrote:
> Sylvia Else wrote:
>
>> On 23/07/2016 2:09 AM, Greg Buttler wrote:
>>> Sylvia Else wrote:
>>>
>>>> There cannot be two different correct theories, because if they're
>>>> different, they'll sometimes give different answers, and at least one
>>>> would have to be wrong.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure it works like that. You may easily have to distinct
>>> theories predicting same outcome. However, the discussion is not about
>>> it, but combining all existing theories into a single one. There is no
>>> need for that.
>>
>> If you have two separate theories that address disjoint aspects of
>> physics - that is, there are no areas of physics that both theories
>> address - then you can trivially put them together to form a single
>> theory.
>
> You may want to rephrase this total nonsense.
>

No, I stand by it in its original form.

Perhaps you just don't understand it.

Sylvia.

Back to sci.physics | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: QM and GR. Greg Buttler <grgb@novotnysite.org> - 2016-07-22 16:09 +0000
  Re: QM and GR. edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-07-24 17:19 -0700
  Re: QM and GR. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-07-25 12:21 +1000
    Re: QM and GR. "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 11:06 -0700
      Re: QM and GR. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-07-26 13:00 +1000
        Re: QM and GR. "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 09:44 -0700
          Re: QM and GR. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-07-27 12:51 -0700
    Re: QM and GR. Tsvetana Kasatkina <tzve@noemail.info> - 2016-07-29 20:23 +0000
      Re: QM and GR. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-31 19:05 -0700
      Re: QM and GR. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-19 13:05 +1000

csiph-web