XPost: sci.physics.relativity   
   From: f00@0f0.00f   
      
   Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:   
   > jojo wrote:   
   >> J. J. Lodder wrote:   
   >>> jojo  wrote:   
   >>>> he no believe in action at a distance.   
   >>>   
   >>> It was obvious after 1905 that Newtonian gravity   
   >>> must be incorrect. (because non-relativistic)   
   >   
   > That something was missing in that theory was already clear when, after   
   > searching for it since ca. 1850, again no planet Vulcan (sic) was found to   
   > explain Mercury's perihelion precession in the Crocker Expeditions of 1901,   
   > 1905, and 1908.   
   >   
   >>> But it took another 10 years to find the correct replacement,   
   >>   
   >> there is a growing voice that fundamental physics has stalled   
   >> since the 1980s.   
   >   
   > Because for various reasons the percentage of people who have no clue about   
   > science has been growing (as we can also see here), not because there is   
   > anything wrong with the science.   
   >   
   >> maybe with ai we can change that.   
   >   
   > Replacing untrained idiots by trained idiots?  I doubt it.   
   >   
      
   any examples that could highlight fundamental progress beyond 80s?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)