tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post2532897904164486670..comments2024-03-28T19:56:42.305-05:00Comments on Alexander Pruss's Blog: Special relativity and the A-theoryAlexander R Prusshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05989277655934827117noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-63483482194288864232019-01-01T09:37:50.938-06:002019-01-01T09:37:50.938-06:00i read your post. it was very interesting. i have ...i read your post. it was very interesting. i have also written a post in this topic where i have explained special relativity and its history in simple words. please check it out.<br />https://physicstalk1996.blogspot.com/2018/12/specialrelativity.htmlThe Physics Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10235539136833831380noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-23573855227302827502015-11-25T04:51:22.087-06:002015-11-25T04:51:22.087-06:00theory relativity: impossible to go beyond Solar S...theory relativity: impossible to go beyond Solar System...religion: impossible to go beyond Solar System...theory relativity=religion=hoax. Just Time, will demonstrate that relativistic equations are fallacies (fallacy: lie said with to make hurt intention), but...when?, because, meanwhile people looking elsewhere, evidently the religious control the World: business, factories (see that typical religious subliminal threat in discupowered gojjleson-Inquisition image with head-cut...see that religious symbol in microson-Inquisition and its new O.S.10...), jobs, governments...religious control all global media: TV, movies, radio, newspapers censured to free folks opinion...(Internet are totally under religious infection, using the ancient religious malign threatening tactical: "by mouth dies fish", "the same who someone says against us, we say against them"), religious have the Power, and do not permit that Science develop enough for the facts demonstrate the relativistic lie. ½ century ago NASA does not go again to Moon, why?, what are there in Moon that do not want which Humankind knows?...relativity incorporated to religion for avoid Justice, Progress and Equality in distribution of the Goods of the Earth, because that is, always all that is: the poor, poor and the rich, rich... The Evil Empire: religion, armies, monarchies and politicians...when unti?. And now they can to continue with the tale of "the Lorentz factor" &Co. that already minus remains...1,000 years?tonyonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08253501266473243514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-68297030619809746582013-01-31T14:26:26.608-06:002013-01-31T14:26:26.608-06:00One final point: Dr. Pruss mentions in the origina...One final point: Dr. Pruss mentions in the original post that there must be natural laws to explain why certain relations of simultaneity closely resemble the absolute ones. Also, he says that it is surprising that the laws of motion are the same regardless of reference frame, if there really is an absolute, privileged frame. However, both of these matters are resolved in the Lorentzian interpretation, wherein the privileged frame is identified as the aether, and dynamic interactions account for the reference-frame-specific effects. <br /><br />Moreoever, if God exists, then surely He will have knowledge of relations of absolute simultaneity. So, for the theist, there shouldn't be any difficulty here. At least, if the theist conceives of God as temporally dynamic.Michael Gonzalezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05279261871735286117noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-84796443980115401582013-01-31T14:11:24.416-06:002013-01-31T14:11:24.416-06:00One thing to remember is that Einstein's only ...One thing to remember is that Einstein's only reason for thinking there was no privileged reference frame was logical positivism. Specifically, verificationism. He felt that, since you could never empirically verify the privileged reference frame, it therefore was meaningless to speak of it. After the death of logical positivism, and the verificationist principle of meaning, people have tried to form a non-verificationist interpretation of STR, and this is rather friendly to a neo-Lorentzian view.Michael Gonzalezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05279261871735286117noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-56608660787565313872013-01-31T14:09:52.426-06:002013-01-31T14:09:52.426-06:00What you need is a neo-Lorentzian interpretation t...What you need is a neo-Lorentzian interpretation to STR. William Lane Craig has written extensively on this, and collaborated with several others. So long as there is a privileged reference frame, in which relations of simultaneity obtain, you have an A-theory compatible STR. This would also help explain several different results in Quantum Mechanics that appear causally determined, and yet would require superluminal transmission of signals.Michael Gonzalezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05279261871735286117noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-3580802814704149162013-01-30T16:29:21.620-06:002013-01-30T16:29:21.620-06:00But isn't the A-theory saying that there's...But isn't the A-theory saying that there's something ontologically-privoleged, esp. with presentism? It would be weird indeed if what exists in spacetime is unrelated to the things physics can tell us about spacetime.Jeremy Piercehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03441308872350317672noreply@blogger.com