[Tom Van Flandern]
? argues that the [Lorentz Relativity]
? theory, the primary competitor to special relativity, does a better job of explaining the
Speed of gravity, and is suppored by all the existing experimental evidence that supports special relativity.
There are a hundred and three alternatives to special relativity, and next to noone takes them seriously. Discussion of the particular alternatives definitely does not belong on a main page like special relativity, any more than discussion of Velikovsky belongs on history or discussion of Nostradamus belongs on theology.
While Josh Grosse may feel this way, I'd like him to at least name five of these hundred and three alternatives that are known to fit all the existing experimental evidence. I have my doubts that they exist, based on what I have read about physics. Having read Tom Van Flandern's article, I think Ben was right in putting this note in the article on special relativity. (hmm. maybe I should let Ben fight his own battles though...)
![[Home]](wikipedia.png)