Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote:
As a simplistic example, relativistic physics doesn't make Newtonian
physics "wrong", discard it or revise it, Newton just becomes a subset,
a special case where if velocity is much, much smaller than c, the
effects of velocity can be ignored.
As an earlier simplistic example, the four elements of fire,
earth, air, and water are not all the elements that exist
although one might rationalize that those four elements are
a subset of the periodic table of the elements.
Except no one ever did experiments to prove the hypothesis that fire,
earth, air, and water were elements, so it remained a hypothesis until
experiments were conducted to define elements, at which time the
hypothesis was discarded.
Hypotheses are discarded all the time, theories aren't.
You do know the difference between a scientific theory and a scientific
hypothesis, don't you?
Forcing boundary conditions on existing "laws of physics" doesn't
make things like Newtonian physics any more accurate. It just
makes some of us human beings feel better about our sacred
cows. :-)
Nonsense, it is just reality.
Everything has boundary conditions, except maybe your proclivity
to try and stir the pot.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply.