Difference between revisions of "The Fallacy of Misplaced Concreteness as Revealed in Special Relativity"
(Imported from text file) |
(Imported from text file) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Infobox paper | {{Infobox paper | ||
| title = The Fallacy of Misplaced Concreteness as Revealed in Special Relativity | | title = The Fallacy of Misplaced Concreteness as Revealed in Special Relativity | ||
| − | | author = [[John E | + | | author = [[John E Chappell]] |
| keywords = [[Special Relativity]] | | keywords = [[Special Relativity]] | ||
| published = 1999 | | published = 1999 | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
==Abstract== | ==Abstract== | ||
| − | Exposing logical flaws in special relativity (SR) and its alleged supporting evidence usually involves finding circular reasoning or applying the law of noncontradiction. But also very useful is invoking the fallacy of misplaced concreteness (or "reification"), which occurs when properties of substantive things are attributed to non-substantive things or concepts. Example: a controlling influence over light velocity can logically be attributed only to something that can exert force, and this a coordinate system (CS), which is only an abstract set of points and lines, can not do; yet. in effect. the second postulate of SR claims that light velocity is fixed by the CS of the observer. Related arguments can firmly prove that space cannot curve and times cannot dilate. Such proofs cannot be refuted by any claim of experimental evidence to the contrary. | + | Exposing logical flaws in special relativity (SR) and its alleged supporting evidence usually involves finding circular reasoning or applying the law of noncontradiction. But also very useful is invoking the fallacy of misplaced concreteness (or "reification"), which occurs when properties of substantive things are attributed to non-substantive things or concepts. Example: a controlling influence over light velocity can logically be attributed only to something that can exert force, and this a coordinate system (CS), which is only an abstract set of points and lines, can not do; yet. in effect. the second postulate of SR claims that light velocity is fixed by the CS of the observer. Related arguments can firmly prove that space cannot curve and times cannot dilate. Such proofs cannot be refuted by any claim of experimental evidence to the contrary. |
| − | [[Category:Relativity]] | + | [[Category:Scientific Paper|fallacy misplaced concreteness revealed special relativity]] |
| + | |||
| + | [[Category:Relativity|fallacy misplaced concreteness revealed special relativity]] | ||
Latest revision as of 20:01, 1 January 2017
| Scientific Paper | |
|---|---|
| Title | The Fallacy of Misplaced Concreteness as Revealed in Special Relativity |
| Author(s) | John E Chappell |
| Keywords | Special Relativity |
| Published | 1999 |
| Journal | None |
Abstract
Exposing logical flaws in special relativity (SR) and its alleged supporting evidence usually involves finding circular reasoning or applying the law of noncontradiction. But also very useful is invoking the fallacy of misplaced concreteness (or "reification"), which occurs when properties of substantive things are attributed to non-substantive things or concepts. Example: a controlling influence over light velocity can logically be attributed only to something that can exert force, and this a coordinate system (CS), which is only an abstract set of points and lines, can not do; yet. in effect. the second postulate of SR claims that light velocity is fixed by the CS of the observer. Related arguments can firmly prove that space cannot curve and times cannot dilate. Such proofs cannot be refuted by any claim of experimental evidence to the contrary.
