
www.Usenet.com
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (OC) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... HI all >> >I am more interested in the breakdowns of the theories that are more >> >correct than classical physics in describing the universe, like QED or >> >GR. OC >I never had the ambition to explain things within the General Theory >of Relativity, OC Oh, boy...kst opinion to follow... I quote you from above, "I am more interested ...in... GR." Uncle Al is measuring you're *Ding-Bat* Quotient! Ding-Bat = The dichotomy of posting two conflicting statements successively. So I'm measuring a 180 DB IQ, for what it's worth, you're a DB genuis. >so it might be possible that my last paragraph does not >make sense within GR. >But if somebody can explain why it does not, that would be helpful. >OC Sure, I'd like to try. Relativity is an Oxymoron for Invariant. When relativity is turned *inside-out* it becomes a theory of invariants. So to say any non-relative quantity is the same in all frames, and is an invariant. The less secure thinkers, find security among invariants that are true everywhere in the universe forever, in search. Ken S. Tucker
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |