| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Alf P. Steinbach" |
| Date: |
28 Mar 2006 09:12:48 AM |
| Object: |
Incompetent moderator in [sci.physics.research] |
Brian Greene (see <url: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Greene>), in
his book "The elegant universe", starts out by explaining that quantum
mechanics and relativity are mutually incompatible:
"As they are currently formulated, general relativity and quantum
mechanics /cannot both be right/. The two theories underlying the
tremendous progress of physics during the last hundred years -
progress that has explained the expansion of the heavens and the
fundamental structure of matter - are mutually incompatible".
That's the orthodox, conventional view, as expressed by one of the
world's foremost, acknowledged experts.
Then here's a quote from a rejection mail from a [sci.physics.research]
moderator, whom I shall let remain anonymous:
"Quantum mechanics is not incompatible with relativity. Please avoid
making uninformed statements."
No other reason for rejection was offered, and the article in question
just requested clarification of a previous (seemingly irrelevant) reply
in a thread.
Perhaps the conventional, orthodox view is incorrect, but I don't think
moderators should take it upon them selves to censor the conventional
and let whatever quack view they subscribe to, let through. I don't
think they should censor the unconventional, either. But it is doubly
ironic when the censorship is based on the moderator's incompetence.
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
.
|
|
| User: "Martin Hogbin" |
|
| Title: Re: Incompetent moderator in [sci.physics.research] |
28 Mar 2006 12:32:08 PM |
|
|
"Alf P. Steinbach" <alfps@start.no> wrote in message news:48t1vrFlqroqU1@individual.net...
Brian Greene (see <url: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Greene>), in
his book "The elegant universe", starts out by explaining that quantum
mechanics and relativity are mutually incompatible:
"As they are currently formulated, general relativity and quantum
mechanics /cannot both be right/. The two theories underlying the
tremendous progress of physics during the last hundred years -
progress that has explained the expansion of the heavens and the
fundamental structure of matter - are mutually incompatible".
That's the orthodox, conventional view, as expressed by one of the
world's foremost, acknowledged experts.
Then here's a quote from a rejection mail from a [sci.physics.research]
moderator, whom I shall let remain anonymous:
Why not make your point here?
Martin Hogbin
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alf P. Steinbach" |
|
| Title: Re: Incompetent moderator in [sci.physics.research] |
28 Mar 2006 12:18:14 PM |
|
|
* Martin Hogbin:
Why not make your point here?
As you suggest, I have replied to your article in yet a third thread in
another newsgroup, but for your convenience, a summary: I apologize for
not making my point clear enough in the posting you replied to; I did
try my very best to make that point abundantly clear.
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "srp" |
|
| Title: Re: Incompetent moderator in [sci.physics.research] |
28 Mar 2006 11:37:50 AM |
|
|
Alf P. Steinbach a écrit :
Brian Greene (see <url: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Greene>), in
his book "The elegant universe", starts out by explaining that quantum
mechanics and relativity are mutually incompatible:
"As they are currently formulated, general relativity and quantum
mechanics /cannot both be right/. The two theories underlying the
tremendous progress of physics during the last hundred years -
progress that has explained the expansion of the heavens and the
fundamental structure of matter - are mutually incompatible".
That's the orthodox, conventional view, as expressed by one of the
world's foremost, acknowledged experts.
Then here's a quote from a rejection mail from a [sci.physics.research]
moderator, whom I shall let remain anonymous:
"Quantum mechanics is not incompatible with relativity. Please avoid
making uninformed statements."
No other reason for rejection was offered, and the article in question
just requested clarification of a previous (seemingly irrelevant) reply
in a thread.
Perhaps the conventional, orthodox view is incorrect, but I don't think
moderators should take it upon them selves to censor the conventional
and let whatever quack view they subscribe to, let through. I don't
think they should censor the unconventional, either. But it is doubly
ironic when the censorship is based on the moderator's incompetence.
The orthodox view is correct, and for a very simple reason. GR requires
as a foundation that spacetime be a continuum while QM requires that
the fundamental reality be quantized. This is why all attempts at
unifying both have always failed.
Note however that the moderator said that QM is not incompatible with
"relativity", not that it was not incompatible with "general relativity"
(GR). QM is perfctly reconcilable with relativistic considerations, but
definitely not with GR.
André Michaud
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "jcon" |
|
| Title: Re: Incompetent moderator in [sci.physics.research] |
28 Mar 2006 11:27:36 AM |
|
|
Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
Brian Greene (see <url: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Greene>), in
his book "The elegant universe", starts out by explaining that quantum
mechanics and relativity are mutually incompatible:
"As they are currently formulated, general relativity and quantum
mechanics /cannot both be right/. The two theories underlying the
tremendous progress of physics during the last hundred years -
progress that has explained the expansion of the heavens and the
fundamental structure of matter - are mutually incompatible".
That's the orthodox, conventional view, as expressed by one of the
world's foremost, acknowledged experts.
Then here's a quote from a rejection mail from a [sci.physics.research]
moderator, whom I shall let remain anonymous:
"Quantum mechanics is not incompatible with relativity. Please avoid
making uninformed statements."
You'll need to provide the text of the post that was rejected.
QM is certainly compatible with special relativity and the
incompatibilities with GR may or may not have been relevant to
the point you were trying to make.
-jc
No other reason for rejection was offered, and the article in question
just requested clarification of a previous (seemingly irrelevant) reply
in a thread.
Perhaps the conventional, orthodox view is incorrect, but I don't think
moderators should take it upon them selves to censor the conventional
and let whatever quack view they subscribe to, let through. I don't
think they should censor the unconventional, either. But it is doubly
ironic when the censorship is based on the moderator's incompetence.
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
