My point with Moorad was not that GR was an efficient computational tool
for the solar system which is surely isn't. I was contesting his apparent
claim that there is way to be sure our mathematical systems really
represent reality. I think they do at the very least approximate it to a
high degree.
>George Murphy has already commented on this concerning the fact that,
>although GR is confirmed to experimental accuracy for all observations so
>far, the precision of that confirmation is not nearly so spectacular as for
>quantum electrodynamics (QED).
Having just gotten a new computer, my files are spread all over the place
right now. I thought I had gotten the idea that GR was the most highly
verified from Hugh Ross. I couldn't find it. Does anyone else know of Ross
saying this?
glenn
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm