Apologize and Resolve Speculative Physics Debate: 65 Characters

[Eric B]

Your belief is incorrect and self-contradictory, as many beliefs are.

Please stop speculating. It is contrary to the forum rules which you agreed to when you signed up.

If you believe that the concept of an inertial rest frame for light is scientifically well-founded then please provide a mainstream scientific reference supporting the idea.

It must be me but I cannot find anything related to physics in this topic. Anything with rest mass cannot travel at the speed of light. I do not see the point in speculating about what if it could, it can't, end of argument.

As both atyy and DaleSpam already said, there is no Lorentz inertial frame at c. It is a meaningless and self-contradictory concept. Read the FAQ. The FAQ exists to forestall nonsense discussions.

I apologize, then. I guess I glossed over that part of the rules, and didn't realize that such discussions were basically not allowed.
Though I really did not know where the line between overly speculative was drawn.
The idea was an extension of standardly held principles, so I didn't think it was too speculatory. And I did reference a link provided that seemed to support the idea (and even acknowledged it was non-Lorentzian) and he was an MIT scientist. (Or is string theory not considered mainstream here? I'm not being facetious; I know that to some, it isn't; for they dismiss it so hard as to be, in their words; "not even wrong").
(And I don't see how it not off-topic, because it was about general relativity, which was the sub-forum it was placed under).

I still think the whole "self-contradictory" charge was being pontificated a bit too quickly (and used as the main opposition) without considering the other frame of reference, which balanced it out. It just didn't fit the current convention (As most theories don't in the beginning. Just saw an example of this on the new Briane Greene show last night), and that's was the real reason it is "wrong" according to the board rules.
So again; I'm terribly sorry if this was not a place to debate such ideas.

 

[micromass]

Did you want to ask a question or something?? Or did you just wanted to apologize??

 

[Eric B]

Just to apologize. (And if this was the wrong sub-forum to do this, then I guess I did it again, and apologize again!)

 

[russ_watters]

No worries - this forum is unusually tightly moderated and many people don't get that right away.