Article View: sci.physics.relativity
Article #5566Re: LEE SMOLIN AGAINST ISAAC NEWTON
From: Eric Gisse
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:40
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:40
62 lines
4576 bytes
4576 bytes
On Feb 9, 7:46 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote: > On Feb 9, 8:42�pm, Randy Poe <poespam-t...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 9, 7:53 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote: > > > > OK, so you do not believe Kepler had a number. > > > I didn't say whether I believed Kepler had a number of not. > > I asked you what number you were referring to. > > > > Kepler thought that he > > > did. �It was R^3/T^2 = 3.353, more or less. > > > OK, that's a number. What about it? > > > > Newton used Kepler's number in his equation for the centripetal force > > > on a planet. > > > No, Newton didn't "use Kepler's number". Newton > > proved why R and T have this relation from more fundamental > > considerations. > > > > Now I don't know what you are saying about welding. > > > I'm asking you what theory you want to talk about. > > > (1) Newton's theory, which would be the theory that, you know, > > was Newton's. I will only insist on sticking to Newton physics > > if you say that we are having a "pure Newtonian" discussion. > > That would be what is implied by the words "Newtonian" > > and "pure". > > > (2) GR, where time is affected by gravitational potential > > and orbits are geodesics, or > > > (3) Some theory where you have welded GR results with > > Newtonian equations, which is neither GR nor Newton but > > a hybrid monster, and possibly not drivable. > > > I'm happy to talk about one, but you have to pick. Don't > > say you're talking about (1) and then immediately switch > > to (3). > > > You have some question about the GR effect of time > > and gravitational fields. So we're in either (2) or > > (3). Which is it, and what's your question? > > > � � � � - Randy > > I don't really have any questions any more. I had a question about 20 > years ago which I posted in this newsgroup which was about the two > little equations Einstein extracted from the Lorentz equations, x=ct, > x'=ct'. After years and years of nonsense, I finally figured out the > answer to my question. Einstein's two little equations were wrong. > The Lorentz equations were not the correct equations for what Einstein > said he was doing. 20 years and you still don't understand? Nice. [...]
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<4cd67700-6de3-4763-9e7e-53f6a6ebe3eb@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com!not-for-mailReferences:
<e3cb16d6-c73b-4e59-9f50-5cda6da5d475@m62g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> <2d490532-d50e-4844-87de-3e344d32a38c@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com> <8e59fbdc-a6c1-4a9b-bc73-7b6a266a086b@y5g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> <85f3648c-0aea-4d4b-a4af-19a13c01ee4a@v67g2000hse.googlegroups.com> <1a4c7fbf-7a63-4260-90d1-79c726699e40@i72g2000hsd.googlegroups.com> <d1449a59-59a7-43ee-8d52-a3746cbcd1f9@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com> <b99da117-9afc-4d7d-8a7a-1e7acc6587c7@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com> <ff276db1-7945-4daf-9208-07293ac33971@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com> <9d9db34f-9b12-48ee-aa73-66a6386c83f6@1g2000hsl.googlegroups.com> <4a961b3a-67ca-46a0-8d32-a99e9e968108@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com> <6ba40b65-26de-433f-b7a7-28a1ef5dcfcf@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com> <e7c6cb47-8521-46f2-9955-148a2167a84a@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Thread: 10f545,89f2be10e566fb3e X-Google-Thread: 10b271,89f2be10e566fb3e X-Google-Thread: fa4c1,89f2be10e566fb3e X-Google-Thread: 1139f8,89f2be10e566fb3e X-Google-Thread: f55d3,89f2be10e566fb3e X-Google-Attributes: gid10f545,gid10b271,gidfa4c1,gid1139f8,gidf55d3,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8 Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Eric Gisse <jowr.pi@gmail.com> Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity, sci.physics, fr.sci.physique, fr.sci.maths, fr.sci.philo Subject: Re: LEE SMOLIN AGAINST ISAAC NEWTON Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 03:40:21 -0800 (PST) Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 62 Message-ID: <4cd67700-6de3-4763-9e7e-53f6a6ebe3eb@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com> References: <e3cb16d6-c73b-4e59-9f50-5cda6da5d475@m62g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> <2d490532-d50e-4844-87de-3e344d32a38c@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com> <8e59fbdc-a6c1-4a9b-bc73-7b6a266a086b@y5g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> <85f3648c-0aea-4d4b-a4af-19a13c01ee4a@v67g2000hse.googlegroups.com> <1a4c7fbf-7a63-4260-90d1-79c726699e40@i72g2000hsd.googlegroups.com> <d1449a59-59a7-43ee-8d52-a3746cbcd1f9@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com> <b99da117-9afc-4d7d-8a7a-1e7acc6587c7@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com> <ff276db1-7945-4daf-9208-07293ac33971@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com> <9d9db34f-9b12-48ee-aa73-66a6386c83f6@1g2000hsl.googlegroups.com> <4a961b3a-67ca-46a0-8d32-a99e9e968108@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com> <6ba40b65-26de-433f-b7a7-28a1ef5dcfcf@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com> <e7c6cb47-8521-46f2-9955-148a2167a84a@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 137.229.60.138 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1202643621 6765 127.0.0.1 (10 Feb 2008 11:40:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:40:21 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com; posting-host=137.229.60.138; posting-account=rIfu6QoAAAD5nXG3h9QEE0J3dZn1U45R User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.12) Gecko/20080201 Firefox/2.0.0.12,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)