Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #476436

Re: Relative motion again

From	Ntowicz Usarczyk <iswso@wioioksi.io>
Newsgroups	sci.physics.relativity
Subject	Re: Relative motion again
Date	2018-11-06 20:32 +0000
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<prstpq$bbh$4@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <g4cbr4F5gouU1@mid.individual.net> <21c231c1-6dad-41e1-84d3-ba79f3ce0516@googlegroups.com> <3dfd0fc7-ad0b-0857-090c-eb5441ac6b3b@PointedEars.de> <39a3496a-07a1-48f5-a9e4-7acb1fde0897@googlegroups.com> <uqKdnbIcA7urNXzGnZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On Tue, 06 Nov 2018 08:41:58 -0600, Tom Roberts wrote:

> At present in physics we have two rather complex models which together
> apply to just about all interesting physical situations: the standard
> model and General Relativity [#]. There are rather strong indications
> that neither one of them is a "final theory", but to date all efforts to
> improve and/or combine them have failed.

First you have to agree with yourself, and everybody else, are those 
models or theories. If for nothing, to avoid confusion.

You build models based on theories, not the other way around. In physics.

> 	[#] Some would add the /\CDM model of cosmology.
> Note that both of these models have SR at their foundation. SR is among
> the best-tested theories we have, right up there with with the atomic
> theory of matter, the evolution of life on earth, and the heliocentric
> model of the solar system. It is perverse to claim SR is somehow
> "wrong", and only grossly ignorant people do so.

SR is just a subset (a misinterpretation) of my Divergent Matter of the 
Moving Bodies Model. (electrodynamically included)

Thread

Relative motion again xip1415926@gmail.com - 2018-11-05 10:49 -0800
  Re:Relative motion again Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-11-05 20:16 +0100
    Re:Relative motion again Buck Dehner <uktea@yswdoiz.cp> - 2018-11-05 21:07 +0000
      Re:Relative motion again Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-11-05 22:55 +0100
        Re:Relative motion again Buck Dehner <uktea@yswdoiz.cp> - 2018-11-05 22:46 +0000
          Re:Relative motion again Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-11-06 01:22 +0100
            Re:Relative motion again Ntowicz Usarczyk <iswso@wioioksi.io> - 2018-11-06 20:27 +0000
  Re: Relative motion again Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2018-11-06 13:16 +1100
    Re: Relative motion again benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-05 21:45 -0500
      Re: Relative motion again Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2018-11-06 14:57 +1100
    Re: Relative motion again xip1415926@gmail.com - 2018-11-05 19:58 -0800
      Re: Relative motion again xip1415926@gmail.com - 2018-11-05 21:24 -0800
      Re: Relative motion again Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2018-11-06 18:10 +1100
      Re: Relative motion again Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-06 09:21 +0100
        Re: Relative motion again xip1415926@gmail.com - 2018-11-06 06:03 -0800
          Re: Relative motion again Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-06 08:41 -0600
            Re: Relative motion again Ntowicz Usarczyk <iswso@wioioksi.io> - 2018-11-06 20:32 +0000
              Re: Relative motion again Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-06 20:39 -0600
                Re: Relative motion again Ntowicz Usarczyk <iswso@wioioksi.io> - 2018-11-07 19:44 +0000
          Re: Relative motion again Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-06 22:32 +0100

csiph-web