5 ms·
I mean, if the goal is to keep it simple and wrong we can remove even more things then. JK. What Special Relativity was, is work in progress, General Relativit
by 3cats-in-a-coat 3y ago
I mean, if the goal is to keep it simple and wrong we can remove even more things then. JK. What Special Relativity was, is work in progress, General Relativity is the whole model, it makes sense together, it’s cohesive, and it’s cohesive because it has gravity in. Without it, this universe does not exist. Although it is slightly off-topic here, I would actually suggest that without gravity there is no time, but this is another story.
- BoiledCabbage 3y agoYes but the parts related to GR are irrelevant. That's like if CS needed a Newtonian Physics model for something seeing it and saying "ah ha, computers invented GR Because they exist in a universe that uses it." Just because newtonian physics is a sub part of GR, doesn't mean "GR" is the best way to describe basic F=ma. The smallest subset theory that incorporates the need for vector clocks, and the most unique part that introduced and required vector clocks is special relativity - which is what thats what's most appropriate to discuss and not GR.