Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

A simply-put flaw of general relativity

  • 05-10-2006 9:54pm
    #1
    Zanket
    Closed Accounts Posts: 107 ✭✭


    This paper is my latest attempt to show a flaw of general relativity (GR) in a simple way. Polite discussion / criticism / attempts to refute appreciated.


Comments

  • #2
    Son Goku
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,475 ✭✭✭Son Goku


    so in the tree’s frame the star can recede to any distance in an arbitrarily short time while moving slower than c, hence remaining observable.
    Explain this.


  • #3
    Professor_Fink
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 861 ✭✭✭Professor_Fink


    Zanket's Paper #2 wrote:
    But also according to general relativity (the theory as a whole, not the equivalence principle per se), the ball at right cannot traverse the uniform gravitational field (the box) in an arbitrarily short time in the tree’s frame, even in principle.

    That is wrong. You seem to completely ignore length contraction.


  • #4
    Zanket
    Closed Accounts Posts: 107 ✭✭Zanket


    Professor_Fink wrote:
    That is wrong. You seem to completely ignore length contraction.
    I've decided it's not worth my time to discuss this in a thread that can be closed for a spurious reason. But I'd enjoy a discussion with you, so I'll respond by PM. Or you can google the title to find another forum it's on.


  • #5
    Son Goku
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,475 ✭✭✭Son Goku


    Zanket wrote:
    I've decided it's not worth my time to discuss this in a thread that can be closed for a spurious reason. But I'd enjoy a discussion with you, so I'll respond by PM. Or you can google the title to find another forum it's on.
    :rolleyes: This thread was only posted so you could make this comment, well done Zanket.

    Besides this thread won't be locked because you didn't put technical on it, that was the sole reason I locked the other one, you weren't reaching the standard.


  • #6
    Zanket
    Closed Accounts Posts: 107 ✭✭Zanket


    You think a result of a numerical integration cannot approximate (to any desired precision) that of calculus, a belief that disagrees with the definition of numerical integration. Students of calculus learn the opposite on their first day of class. It’s no wonder you think I didn’t meet a scientific standard. And it was you, not me, who made claims and refused to support them. Your moderation doesn’t allow for scientific discussion.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Son Goku
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,475 ✭✭✭Son Goku


    Zanket wrote:
    You think a result of a numerical integration cannot approximate (to any desired precision) that of calculus, a belief that disagrees with the definition of numerical integration. Students of calculus learn the opposite on their first day of class. It’s no wonder you think I didn’t meet a scientific standard.
    Let me get this straight, I didn't think you were reaching the scientific standard because of the way students are thought calculus?
    What in the flying gazu has numerical integration's accuracy got to do with anything we were discussing and when did I express the view that it wasn't accurate?
    What are you talking about?
    You have already declared this forum to not be worth your time, have you changed your mind or not? If you haven't then there is no reason to come here and claim I have weird beliefs about numerical integration. (Possibly the strangest insult ever.)


Advertisement