The Theory of Relativity has been established in the scientific world for some time. However, the relativization of space and time has been publically attacked with the call for "healthy common sense" since the twenties. Healthy common sense stands for the demand for general comprehenibility and clarity of a physical theory. A description of reality can only be correct if it is understood by everyone with everyday experience.
Physicists, philosophers and scientific laymen try to prove that modern physics is an absurd, incorrect development of science. Can physics do without the ether as a medium for the propogation of light? How does one conceive curved space and relative time? If simultaneity is not absolute, does that not relativize reality?
The Theory of Relativity has been established in the scientific world for some time. However, the relativization of space and time has been publically attacked with the call for "healthy common sense" since the twenties. Healthy common sense stands for the demand for general comprehenibility and clarity of a physical theory. A description of reality can only be correct if it is understood by everyone with everyday experience.
Physicists, philosophers and scientific laymen try to prove that modern physics is an absurd, incorrect development of science. Can physics do without the ether as a medium for the propogation of light? How does one conceive curved space and relative time? If simultaneity is not absolute, does that not relativize reality?