Article View: sci.physics
Article #4649Re: GR with no Einstein? (Was: Re: No big crunch?)
From: Matthew P Wiener
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 20:53
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 20:53
27 lines
1990 bytes
1990 bytes
In article <1992Nov9.182446.13635@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, crb7q@kelvin (Cameron Randale Bass) writes: > It is wonderful what we can do once we know the 'answer', no? Yes. It makes it easy to say absolutely anything regarding what might have been. > Though many people were working on gravitation, and always had > been working on gravitation (and there are still people working > on alternatives), it wasn't like there was any vastly compelling > reason to overthrow Newton. Huh? How about the incompatibility of SR with gravitation? >> (3) One does have to decide what "GR would have been developed" means. >> Would it count to have a theory equivalent to GR, not generally >> accepted but merely one of a welter of competing theories? > Absolutely, if we had had to wait until renormalizability > became a criterion for physical law, I suspect that *no* such > theory would have become accepted. I have to agree that Einstein's absolute imprimatur and the mystique of the immense difficulty of GR and the post-WW1 Eddington eclipse measurement carried GR permanantly into the #1 position over its then non-existent competition. -- -Matthew P Wiener (weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<97014@netnews.upenn.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!pipex!warwick!mrccrc!doc.ic.ac.uk!agate!ames!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!netnews.upenn.edu!sagi.wistar.upenn.eduReferences:
<1992Nov9.182446.13635@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!pipex!warwick!mrccrc!doc.ic.ac.uk!agate!ames!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!netnews.upenn.edu!sagi.wistar.upenn.edu From: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) Newsgroups: sci.physics Subject: Re: GR with no Einstein? (Was: Re: No big crunch?) Message-ID: <97014@netnews.upenn.edu> Date: 10 Nov 92 20:53:23 GMT References: <1992Nov9.182446.13635@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> Sender: news@netnews.upenn.edu Reply-To: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) Organization: The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology Lines: 27 Nntp-Posting-Host: sagi.wistar.upenn.edu In-reply-to: crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass)