'We have broken speed of light'

uscitizen said:
wrong. not owned it is still a theory and scientific theories have been proven wrong before.

If owned please send support check :)

Or do you have no personal responsibility for what you own ?

also you will be responsible for any future dumbass things I do ;)
Click to expand...

Everything can be proven wrong. You were using it in the common connotation whenever the scientific definition would be more appropriate. An interesting thing about the English language is that the connatation and context are equally important as the literal definition.
 
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/airtim.html#c1

"During October, 1971, four cesium atomic beam clocks were flown on regularly scheduled commercial jet flights around the world twice, once eastward and once westward, to test Einstein's theory of relativity with macroscopic clocks. From the actual flight paths of each trip, the theory predicted that the flying clocks, compared with reference clocks at the U.S. Naval Observatory, should have lost 40+/-23 nanoseconds during the eastward trip and should have gained 275+/-21 nanoseconds during the westward trip ... Relative to the atomic time scale of the U.S. Naval Observatory, the flying clocks lost 59+/-10 nanoseconds during the eastward trip and gained 273+/-7 nanosecond during the westward trip, where the errors are the corresponding standard deviations. These results provide an unambiguous empirical resolution of the famous clock "paradox" with macroscopic clocks."

J.C. Hafele and R. E. Keating, Science 177, 166 (1972)
 
uscitizen said:
einsteins stuff is largely theory as well.
Click to expand...
In science nothing reaches the level of Theory without consistent evidence to back it up. It is the closest thing to "proven" that you can get. In other words, this has passed the test and has gone from Hypothesis, what the layman usually thinks of as a theory, to a Theory which has been tested and shown to be correct in each test.
 
doniston said:
No, I'm not confused at all, I simply disagree with the whole concept.
Click to expand...
Well, there isn't much to say to that you reject the current Physics as currently accepted and tested.

This is like trying to argue the age of the universe with somebody who believes it is only 6000 years old.
 
Watermark said:
Einstein was wrong on several points, however, concerning general relativity, he was right on almost everything. You, however, have no inkling of an idea what general relativity is, if you think that light is related to time.
Click to expand...
I never said nor inplied that Light was related to time. apparently that is YOUR spin. Go back and read what I really DID say.
 
Damocles said:
Well, there isn't much to say to that you reject the current Physics as currently accepted and tested.

This is like trying to argue the age of the universe with somebody who believes it is only 6000 years old.
Click to expand...

It's like trying to argue with someone who keeps on repeating "Prove to me that you exist!"
 
doniston said:
OH BS. I'm sorry to say this, but you belong with ASSHAT, on this issue. You've read to much and understood to little, and he just understands too little. Everything you postulate is theoretical and definitely includes Einstein's theories. Note: Einstein's THEORIES -(not facts)
Click to expand...
One more time. Check into the Scientific Method. A Theory in science is not a guess, it is tested and proven to be correct in all tests, it is the closest thing to proven you will ever get from science (which, contrary to popular belief, NEVER proves anything).
 
doniston said:
Virtually all of it is. and some is flat unbeleivable and very illogical.
Click to expand...
However tested, in myriad tests over decades and decades and passed in each test.

Your misunderstanding of the difference between a scientific Theory and a detective saying the word "theory" when he is guessing then testing... That is a misnomer, it would be a hypothesis at that level, untested as of yet.
 
Watermark said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory

n common usage, people often use the word theory to signify a conjecture, an opinion, or a speculation. In this usage, a theory is not necessarily based on facts; in other words, it is not required to be consistent with true descriptions of reality. True descriptions of reality are more reflectively understood as statements which would be true independently of what people think about them. In this usage, the word is synonymous with hypothesis.

In science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. It follows from this that for scientists "theory" and "fact" do not necessarily stand in opposition. For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theories commonly used to describe and explain this behaviour are Newton's theory of universal gravitation (see also gravitation), and general relativity.
Click to expand...
What are you doing? going on to be a philosophy majpr? What you have posted here is basically psychobable.
 
Damocles said:
One more time. Check into the Scientific Method. A Theory in science is not a guess, it is tested and proven to be correct in all tests, it is the closest thing to proven you will ever get from science (which, contrary to popular belief, NEVER proves anything).
Click to expand...

It is a theory until it becomes a law.
 
yeah the world is flat, the world is the center of the universe, etc...
It is only a proven theory until we disprove it.
 
Watermark said:
Owned
Click to expand...
The only thing you "OWN" is your own misbegotten ego

You have accomplished nothing else. (At least I'M not impressed.)

On a side note. my daughter is not a member but moitors this forum

a couple of days ago she called me long distance to ask If I really knew what was up with you. she read the post where you said you were going to kill yourself. and she was worried about it. so you see, what you say affects more than just those who post here.
 
Last edited:
No, Law is a Universal "given", something that has always been observed to be.

Here:

http://wilstar.com/theories.htm

Scientific Law: This is a statement of fact meant to explain, in concise terms, an action or set of actions. It is generally accepted to be true and univseral, and can sometimes be expressed in terms of a single mathematical equation. Scientific laws are similar to mathematical postulates. They don’t really need any complex external proofs; they are accepted at face value based upon the fact that they have always been observed to be true.

Specifically, scientific laws must be simple, true, universal, and absolute. They represent the cornerstone of scientific discovery, because if a law ever did not apply, then all science based upon that law would collapse.

Some scientific laws, or laws of nature, include the law of gravity, Newton's laws of motion, the laws of thermodynamics, Boyle's law of gases, the law of conservation of mass and energy, and Hook’s law of elasticity.
Click to expand...

A hypothesis (this is often what people are assuming "Theory" means:

Hypothesis: This is an educated guess based upon observation. It is a rational explanation of a single event or phenomenon based upon what is observed, but which has not been proved. Most hypotheses can be supported or refuted by experimentation or continued observation.
Click to expand...

A Theory:

Theory: A theory is more like a scientific law than a hypothesis. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. One scientist cannot create a theory; he can only create a hypothesis.

In general, both a scientific theory and a scientific law are accepted to be true by the scientific community as a whole. Both are used to make predictions of events. Both are used to advance technology.
Click to expand...

I bolded the real important part...
 
uscitizen said:
wrong. not owned it is still a theory and scientific theories have been proven wrong before.

If owned please send support check :)

Or do you have no personal responsibility for what you own ?

also you will be responsible for any future dumbass things I do ;)
Click to expand...
HE HE, well said.
 
Another interesting difference between a Law and a Theory from the site giving a good explanation of the scientific process I have linked above:

The biggest difference between a law and a theory is that a theory is much more complex and dynamic. A law governs a single action, whereas a theory explains an entire group of related phenomena.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top