XPost: sci.math   
   From: relativity@paulba.no   
      
   Den 13.11.2025 10:01, skrev Thomas Heger:   
   > Am Mittwoch000012, 12.11.2025 um 21:12 schrieb Paul.B.Andersen:   
      
   >   
   > A model is a simplyfied representation of something.   
   >   
   > It has the advantage of being able to be computed and to make predictions.   
   >   
   > But usually the predictions and the real thing differ to some degree,   
   > because the model works upon entirely different principles than the real   
   > thing does.   
      
   The mathematical models SR and GR predict the "real thing" with   
   infinite precision. (Or rather, the precision of the prediction   
   is only limited by how precisely the experiment is defined.)   
      
   It is the measurement of "the real thing" that always will be   
   of limited precision.   
   But SR or GR is considered as confirmed only when the prediction   
   is well within the error bars of the measurement.   
      
   >   
   > Therefore, we need to decide:   
   >   
   > do we want usability or precision?   
      
   < snip lot of nonsense >   
      
   Here is your alternative to mathematical models like SR and GR:   
      
   >   
   > To create good modells we need good understanding of the acting   
   > principles, which nature actually uses.   
   >   
   > But we can't use the same principles in models, because such   
   > a model could not be computed and would take fore ever to make   
   > any predictions.   
   >   
   > That's why we need to give up predictions and computability,   
   > if we want to describe, how nature functions.   
      
   So your alternative 'description of how nature works' can't   
   predict how nature will behave when a well defined experiment   
   is performed, yet it does describe how nature works?   
      
   >   
   > For a model we need something different, hence use simplyfied   
   > approximations.   
   >   
   > This makes models computable, but unfortunately also less precise.   
      
   So in the real world we have to use mathematical models like   
   SR and GR which can predict how nature will behave in well   
   defined experiments.   
      
   According to you, the predictions of SR and GR are less   
   precise than your 'description of how nature works',   
   which can predict nothing about how nature will behave when   
   a well defined experiment is performed.   
      
   ---------------   
      
   Honestly Thomas:   
   This is mindless nonsense!   
   Are you inventing things as you go without considering   
   the consequences of your inventions?   
      
   < snip more stupidities >   
      
      
   >> -----------------------   
   >>   
   >> Now let's look at a meaningful statement:   
   >>   
   >> No theory of physics can "describe what's really happening".   
   >> A theory of physics is a mathematical model of some aspects   
   >> of nature. The best it can do is to give correct predictions   
   >> of what will be measured or observed in some experiments.   
      
   > That is total nonsense.   
   >   
   > If you insist on usuablity, you already failed to understand something.   
      
      
   The following are facts which you claim are "total nonsense":   
      
   "The Special Theory of Relativity (SR)" as defined in Einstein's   
   paper "ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES", and   
   "The General Theory of Relativity (GR)" as defined in Einstein's   
   paper "The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity".   
   are both logically consistent theories.   
      
   Do you dispute this?   
   ====================   
      
   Both these theories of physics give precise predictions   
   for what will be measured in well defined experiments.   
      
   Do you dispute this?   
   ====================   
      
   For a vast number of experiments the predictions of SR and GR   
   are confirmed to be in accordance with measurements.   
      
   Do you dispute this?   
   ====================   
      
   You can see some of these experiment here:   
   https://paulba.no/paper/index.html   
      
   Now you can explain why the mathematical models SR and GR   
   are "total nonsense".   
      
      
      
   --   
   Paul   
      
   https://paulba.no/   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)