On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 3:58 PM, Jason Van Patten <[email protected]> wrote: [snip] > However on point two would i be correct to assume you disavow > the Theory of Relativity in all of its incarnations?
I don't claim there is nothing of merit in it at all. I don't deny that some of the predicted effects have been observed, but I do take serious issue with it, and am not convinced that it explains the observed effects. I take issue with anything requiring forces of attraction/action-at-a-distance in a mechanical (as opposed to magical) universe. I am holding out for a solution that is as elegant in it's simplicity as well as it's comprehensiveness in explaining everything we've observed so far. All theories are suspect anyways--and they should remain as such and not be promoted to religious status--even when they do prove useful. After all, a false premise may predict valid outcomes for entirely wrong reasons, and thus may disappoint surprisingly yielding unfortunate outcomes if wrong at precisely the worst possible timing (Murphy was an optimist). /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
