Spiritual/Political/Philosophical Blog on the Nature of Truth and Falsehood and Heaven
|
|
| Sunny Days in Heaven Spiritual/Political/Philosophical Blog on the Nature of Truth and Falsehood and Heaven |
|
|
Monday, November 03, 2003 I Stump Einstein? Steven Den Beste replied to an email, and follow up of mine at his site. If you're at all familiar with 20th century physics, my query and his replies may interest you. But to Steven and non-euclidian geometry, I say this - I know how the idea of triangles drawn on a basketball (sphere) form more degrees than 360. That still doesn't explain how you can curve Space, particularly when you realize that Space is more like water, an ocean in which all things are immersed. An ocean can have currents, different pressures and temperatures, but you can never curve it non-Euclid or not. Saying that Einstein proved that Space is curved is a poor fallback position. What Einstein proved was that light gets bent. Not that Space is curved. As you often say, correlation is not cause. Also, String theory is a crock of you know what. It ignores the fact that Space/Vacuum is a substance, and not a nothing. That being the case, strings in the super sub-atomic level could not exist alone, but would have to be either smaller or interact with the "beer foam" as Hawkings describes Vacuum. String theory does not account for Vacuum as substance at all, from what I've heard of it. What is actually more possible (but not acceptable to the faithful believers in the Standard Model) is that Einstein and Quantum theory are wrong. Accurate enough in some predictability (like Newton's Laws) to prove useful, but not accurate enough to reconcile the anomalies. Carver Mead has a lot to say about these things and is worth reading here. The original American Spectator article is no longer online, but I have it cached on my hard drive if anyone wants it. posted by Mark Butterworth | 11:48 PM | |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
 |
||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
