Necromancer wrote: ↑Sat Jun 09, 2018 8:55 pmTo my information, based on my physics studies, there is no necessary contradiction between SR, GR and QM. It's only when crazy people start to add unsubstantiated theories that it becomes contradictive.
Here's a crazy person with a Nobel Prize:
"It is ironic that Einstein's most creative work, the general theory of relativity, should boil down to conceptualizing space as a medium when his original premise [in special relativity] was that no such medium existed [..] The word 'ether' has extremely negative connotations in theoretical physics because of its past association with opposition to relativity. This is unfortunate because, stripped of these connotations, it rather nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum. . . . Relativity actually says nothing about the existence or nonexistence of matter pervading the universe, only that any such matter must have relativistic symmetry. [..] It turns out that such matter exists. About the time relativity was becoming accepted, studies of radioactivity began showing that the empty vacuum of space had spectroscopic structure similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and fluids. Subsequent studies with large particle accelerators have now led us to understand that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian emptiness. It is filled with 'stuff' that is normally transparent but can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a part. The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo."
Robert B. Laughlin, Nobel Laureate in Physics, endowed chair in physics, Stanford University
Necromancer wrote: ↑Sat Jun 09, 2018 8:55 pmYou know as well as I do that Theory of Relativity is derived from Newtonian physics. Einstein just happened to have the brains for it. See also the example with the train cart where light travels from the floor of the cart as the cart is moving. External to this is the observer "seeing" something very special, relating to the cart and the light beam shot up to the "very high" ceiling of the cart and, presumably, reflecting back to the cart's floor.
I know. Pages 42-47:
https://willijbouwman.blogspot.com I think you could better defend your accusation of craziness on my part if you were to at least read what I write,