Re: Is the theory of relativity a correct theory?

JanPB wrote:

>
Richard Hachel wrote:

>
Is the theory of relativity a correct theory?
If you ask a moron, he'll say no.
If you ask another idiot, he'll say yes.
Both are wrong.
An intelligent man, capable of correctly mastering the whole theory

from

A to Z, will say that it is partly true and partly false, and he will

put

the two camps back to back.

>
You are overthinking this. The truth is simply that relativity is just
like any other accepted theory in physics. No "partly" this or "partly"
that.
>
The only reason this particular theory is constantly being dissected,
almost always incorrectly, by amateurs is that it's a theory with a
low barrier of mathematical entry. This makes it vulnerable to probing
by armchair critics who have no idea about anything else in physics,
and
thus don't understand where relativity came from and why would anyone
(like
Einstein) ever come up with such a "weird" thing.

Some "amateurs" just don't like the consequences, so they conclude it
must
be wrong.  Some physicists (e.g., Bilaniuk, Deshpanda and Sudershan)
didn't
like the interpretations of other physicists and wrote "Meta"
Relativity.
Other physicists are still publishing papers extending relativity into
the
domain beyond c.  There are "gotchas" in doing that, even for
physicists.
There appears to be a low bar to entry, but there is considerable
subtlety.

Theories which are far, FAR more bizarre, like quantum electrodynamics,
are spared that fate because they are not accessible without a
formidable
mathematical foundation.
>
--
Jan

And some physicists have been extending QFT into the beyond-c domain. Some
conclude that QFT denies the existence of FTL particles and others
conclude
that QFT allows them.  There are "gotchas" here, too.
Gary