I voted to close but I’m not sure it was for the “non- mainstream” reason (I actually don’t remember… it could have been).

I have multiple issue with this question.

First, as a variation of this post, there is a question of attribution, and I think I would have VTC for “more details”. If we want the site to be authoritative, then “my friend and I” rarely meets this standard.

Next, any post headlining “flaws” in relativity based on a discussion between two friends does not do good to the site. For this reason alone I could have VTC as non-mainstream.

Finally, the OP shows no attempt to research the claim and back it up by solid arguments. In fact it’s not that hard to debunk.

I think the question was rightly closed, lest we implicitly want to encourage people “shooting from the hip” and posting questions with provocative titles but minimal contents. If you want to ask about “flaws”, you should know your stuff first and ask later.

I voted to close but I’m not sure it was for the “non- mainstream” reason (I actually don’t remember… it could have been).

I have multiple issue with this question.

First, as a variation of this post, there is a question of attribution, and I think I would have VTC for “more details”. If we want the site to be authoritative, then “my friend and I” rarely meets this standard.

Next, any post headlining “flaws” in a theory based on a discussion between two friends does not do good to the site. For this reason alone I could have VTC as non-mainstream.

Finally, the OP shows no attempt to research the claim and back it up by solid arguments. In fact it’s not that hard to debunk.

I think the question was rightly closed, lest we implicitly want to encourage people “shooting from the hip” and posting questions with provocative titles but minimal contents. If you want to ask about “flaws”, you should know your stuff first and ask later.