An immortal fumble by David Strich (aka iqgoogol@gmail.com aka ...) (9-Aug-2008)
Science according to a maliciously lying imbecile
Your studity is getting tiresome... What is an assistant janitor doing here anyway. Here is the summary. If you cannot follow it, then God help you. The null hypothesis is: GR has no error. Since 3.8 falls within 5.0+/-1.2, the null hypothesis CANNOT BE rejected. This is not the same as ACCEPTING the null hypothesis. If the 3.8 fell outside a range of say 5.0 +/-1.1, then the null hypothesis CAN BE REJECTED, proving it false. In SUMMARY, the 5.0+/-1.2 observation, only allows GR NOT TO BE REJECTED with that particular data. When better data is obtained, the possibility that it CAN BE REJECTED remains. ERGO, GR predictions of planetary orbital precesssions is NOT VALID PROOF of GR, as you have been dubiously claiming since you joined the USENET. That is a long history of either error or plain stupidity. But knowing you, I don't think anybody will be surprised. |
|
| Fumble Index | Original post & context: 0e5caf45-5eda-4671-b273-d21a01ef5d23@26g2000hsk.googlegroups.com |
|
See also |
|