[geocentrism] Re: (no subject)

  • From: RM Mentock <mentock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 15:11:43 -0400

At 02:32 PM 8/1/2004, you wrote:
>On 01 Aug, RM Mentock <mentock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Reply-To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> > At 06:55 AM 8/1/2004, Alan Griffin wrote:
> > >On 31 Jul, . <yerushabel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >  As Moller's text on Relativity makes clear, the centrifugal,
> > > > Coriolis and Eulerian forces which are treated as fictitious forces
> > > > in a non-geocentric context are real, actual forces in a geocentric
> > > > context.
> > >
> > >         No they're not real. They seem to be real if you're in a
> > >rotating environment, but they don't actually exist.
>
> > In general relativity, even gravity is fictitious.
>
>         Thank you. so you're agreeing with me.

Definitely not.

>Snip all the following about general relativity, which is just a
>smoke-screen.

Those were relevant quotes from Einstein, Infeld, and Born.


>         I notice you haven't commented on the "pseudo-scientific mumbo
>jumbo" further down the same article!

Which article?  The two quotes that I included were from books.








Other related posts: