>>14221646Well, let's look at an example what you wrote
>he didn't write down mathematical formulasThis is obviously wrong because relativity is a mathematical theory. Even in Galilean relativity, you can't really think about things like acceleration or velocity without mathematics. I may sound like I'm nitpicking but it's really not hard to tell when you're talking to an amateur.
>In my opinion it means looking at thinks different than what common knowledge tells youIt depends on what you mean by common knowledge. Thinking about space and time is not really part of common knowledge in the first place
>and basically have the same approachObviously I agree that thinking about things deeply is essential in science. What I disagree with is the idea that you need to read the works of some canonical philosophers to contribute to science.
