View Thread

Atheists Today » The Real World » Science
 Print Thread
e=mc2: 103 years later, Einstein's proven right
Skeeve
[url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/sciencephysicseinstein[/url]

[quote]PARIS (AFP)
"The world is my country, and do good is my religion." - Thomas Paine
 
cheshiredragon
Which just proves that Einstein WAS a fscking genius and WAY ahead of his time.
That's right, I said it...
 
Cynic
I'm still waiting for his ultimate triumph over quantum mechanics.
 
catman
You'll have a long wait, Cynic. But I think you must agree that he advanced the 'state of the art' a great deal. After all, one can hardly blame Galileo for not understanding the nature of galaxies.
"If I owned both Hell and Texas, I'd live in Hell and rent out Texas." - General Sheridan
 
Cynic
Oh don't get me wrong -- I'm entirely serious about that. I think Einstein's theories are so fundamentally correct that they will, ultimately triumph over any aspect of QM that stands agaisnt them.
 
Bob of QF
Cynic wrote:
Oh don't get me wrong -- I'm entirely serious about that. I think Einstein's theories are so fundamentally correct that they will, ultimately triumph over any aspect of QM that stands agaisnt them.


To me, that the two theories are in conflict, only goes to show that the underlying "fabric" of the universe is more chaotic than we think.

Yet another nail in the "god hypothesis". Grin

Einstein's theories cover the very, very large: large speeds (relative to lightspeed) large values of mass, large values of gravity, etc.

Quantum-mechanics covers the very, very, very small: atomic level and below. Mostly below.

That the two appear to be in conflict, only says to me, that neither is exactly right.

It's like Newton's theories of motion: as long as you stay away from the limits of things (high gravity, high speeds, superlarge masses, etc) then Newton's equations work quite well. We used them to successfully navigate to the Moon and back, and to Mars.

It takes a very finicky set of observations, or else a great deal of them over hundreds of years, to point out the flaws in Newton's.

So, it's not that Newton was 100% wrong, and that Einstein was 100% right, not the case at all.

Newton was partly wrong. Einstein is partly wrong, too-- only not as much; much more subtly wrong that was Newton.

So, too, I think with QM: subtly wrong; maybe too subtle for our current technology to discern.

That they all are at least to a certain degree, wrong, ought to be a given, I think. Historical trends should tell us that much.

That's okay: Newton was right enough to let us get to the Moon, Mars and beyond the Solar System.

Einstein was right enough to let us build atomic accelerators, and nuclear medicine and other Scientific Wonders.

(forgive me, but I cannot off the top of my head give examples of how QM directly gave us practical science, but I'm certain there are such) Thus, QM is right enough for those, too.

That, to me, is the beauty of science: it's very uncertainty encourages new scientists to CONTINUE to research, to poke at the edges of what is "known".

For at the edges, we find the really GOOD stuff!

Star Gates, anyone? Grin
Edited by Bob of QF on 11/23/2008 16:03
Quantum Junction: Use both lanes

Reality is that which is left, after you stop believing.
 
wuzyla55


Forum Admin Notice:
SPAM removed by Admin


Account banned
Edited by Skeeve on 07/30/2010 10:15
 
Jump to Forum: