David Thomson wrote:
Hi Stephen,
(It just sets my teeth on edge when someone opens a discussion of this
sort with a blanket assertion that SR is "internally inconsistent",
which, thankfully, you didn't do.)
The Aether Physics Model stands on its own. It is not necessary for me to
trash SR by pointing out its major flaws, which I can easily do. I find
that people heavily invested in SR are unwilling to admit the simple and
obvious flaws when I point them out.
Oh jeeze :-) <chuckling to himself> Oh, well, I vented all my spleen
already today on other poor innocents, I'll let this go...
On the other hand, the Aether Physics Model solidly backs General
Relativity.
Say what?? SR is a subset of GR -- it is exactly equal to general
relativity in the absence of mass (flat "background" space).
I can't imagine how you believe you can have GR without SR.
It derives the GR simplified field equation in terms of charges
from first principles.
Do you mean the linearized theory? Didn't follow this.
Einstein's version of GR presents in terms of mass,
and is a tortured process. But tortured or not, the concept that space-time
interacts with matter is valid in both physics models.
Dave
