3 ms·
This is not a convincing argument. We may not have data, but as in other problems in physics we may have indirect ways to get evidence. These indirect ways may
by coliveira 6y ago
This is not a convincing argument. We may not have data, but as in other problems in physics we may have indirect ways to get evidence. These indirect ways may not be apparent nowadays, but may become in the future.
- sampo 6y agoAs far as I understand, Nordström's second theory of gravitation is a mathematically self-consistent theory for gravitation, and the only way to decide between it and Einstein's theory was by comparing to observations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordstr%C3%B6m%27s_theory_of_gravitation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordstr%C3%B6m%27s_theory_of_g...
- tsimionescu 6y agoSure, but until such a time, the problem will remain unsolvable.
- eternalban 6y agoIntuitionism has been knocking on theoretical physics' door for a while now.
- Kranar 6y agoIndirect data is still data. What she's saying is that math equations aren't data and hence math equations alone can't solve this problem.