Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker
DavidMcC wrote:This is already well known, zaybu.
Calilasseia wrote: Indeed, the relativistic coordinate transformation equations reduce trivially to the Newtonian or Galilean transformations when the veloctiy equals zero.
DavidMcC wrote:So, zaybu, were you just being "sensationalist", as iamthereforeithink implied above, or did you really think that no-one knew that Newtonian mechanics are the low speed /low gravity limit of the more generally applicable physics of relativity?
lpetrich wrote:Isaac Asimov - The Relativity of Wrong has an excellent discussion of this issue. Some sorts of wrongness are not so much wrong but approximate, and that's the sort of wrongness that Newtonian mechanics has.
zaybu wrote:lpetrich wrote:Isaac Asimov - The Relativity of Wrong has an excellent discussion of this issue. Some sorts of wrongness are not so much wrong but approximate, and that's the sort of wrongness that Newtonian mechanics has.
It couldn't possibly be completely wrong. If you follow Einstein, it basically went: g00 → φ→ρ→T00. And from that, Einstein deduced brilliantly:
Rμν - ½gμνR = 8ΠGTμν
That Newton is included in Relativity goes without saying.
zaybu wrote:DavidMcC wrote:So, zaybu, were you just being "sensationalist", as iamthereforeithink implied above, or did you really think that no-one knew that Newtonian mechanics are the low speed /low gravity limit of the more generally applicable physics of relativity?
As I stated in the OP, and maybe I should emphasize it, there are too many on the internet who uses these arguments: Einstein proved Newton was wrong; scientific theory one day, gone tomorrow; you can't trust science, it's unreliable, but religion is forever; and so on. And one can't hardly debate that -- no, Newton's law is contained in Relativity. They'll ask, where's the proof. So I thought of putting the actual calculation on a blog so that if anyone encounters such a situation, then one can shut up these ignoramuses. Of course people in the know about physics don't need any convincing. I only used this title because this is how the debate is often framed by people who are trying to discredit science. So, if I implied otherwise, I apologise.
DrWho wrote:He was right about other things such as his three laws of motion and understanding physical phenomena with the tools of mathematics.
Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest