Critics of the Theory of Relativity for Beginners: Difference between revisions
Imported from text file |
Imported from text file |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
<span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial-ItalicMT"> The Theory of Relativity does not show to us a strange behaviour of nature. Strange may be, however, why it could be so widely accepted. It shows to us that every day's methods must not be used in an environment where they are due to fail. Albert Einstein's methods of defining simultaneity and determining it don't match. This paper is intended for nonprofessionals in this matter and does not use mathematical notation. | <span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial-ItalicMT"> The Theory of Relativity does not show to us a strange behaviour of nature. Strange may be, however, why it could be so widely accepted. It shows to us that every day's methods must not be used in an environment where they are due to fail. Albert Einstein's methods of defining simultaneity and determining it don't match. This paper is intended for nonprofessionals in this matter and does not use mathematical notation. | ||
</span>[[Category:Scientific Paper]] | </span> | ||
[[Category:Scientific Paper|critics theory relativity beginners]] | |||
[[Category:Relativity]] | [[Category:Relativity]] | ||
Revision as of 13:13, 1 January 2017
| Scientific Paper | |
|---|---|
| Title | Critics of the Theory of Relativity for Beginners |
| Author(s) | Johannes Rasper |
| Published | 2009 |
| Journal | None |
| No. of pages | 3 |
Abstract
The Theory of Relativity does not show to us a strange behaviour of nature. Strange may be, however, why it could be so widely accepted. It shows to us that every day's methods must not be used in an environment where they are due to fail. Albert Einstein's methods of defining simultaneity and determining it don't match. This paper is intended for nonprofessionals in this matter and does not use mathematical notation.