Einstein’s general theory of relativity appears to dismiss a rigid and universal frame of reference (what you alternatively call a “coordinate system” and/or non-Euclidean geometry). You feel that this dismissal may undermine much of what we observe and know to be true.

I can respond to the assertion, as paraphrased. A physicist would very likely provide a more authoritative and clear response…

Einstein’s special theory of relativity has shattered our concept of a single universal frame of reference, but it has not nullified or undermined the established protocol for measuring 3 dimensional space. Distances and angles exist pretty much as we imagine, but of course on the grand scale of light years.

What Einstein demonstrated (and what has also been validated conclusively in the decades that followed) is that the speed of light is constant from any viewer frame of reference — even if the viewer is moving.

This fact, forced him to reconcile the paradoxes that arise from such a non-intuitive discovery (It is non-intuitive, because it doesn’t have impact in our low-speed existence).

As a result, Einstein theorized (and again, it is now accepted fact), that time and space are malleable. Certain constraints prevent us from visiting the past or affecting the future, but some very shocking things are provable. For example, an individual who travels at great speed and then returns experiences a shorter period of time than his earthbound friend. (At speeds & duration traveled by rockets, the time difference is small, but matches theory precisely).

Gravity curves the space around it, but this, too, does not invalidate Euclidean measurement. I like to think of the “curve” as a way to calculate the position of objects whose received light waves have been bent by the effect of massive objects near its path. (I especially like the metaphor of massive objects having weight on a 2D sheet of rubber and creating a parabolic gravity-well). Ultimately, gravity, space and time are interrelated in ways that we did not appreciate before Einstein.

Of course, there are some really incredible paradoxes. One of these is the EPR paradox which I wrote about here at Lifeboat: http://lifeboat.com/blog/2015/06/quantum-entanglement-epr-paradox

These, too, resolve in a manner that is consistent with observation, but with some profound implications that inspire awe. They are the quantum phenomena that are sometimes used to support or refute the existence of God or of multiple universes.

In my opinion, they are simply the way in which the universe works. Not all of it is obvious to our senses, because our senses weren’t designed to discern things beyond our frame of reference and our immediate environment.

Did I get the gist of your Facebook complaint? If not, please summarize. Explain it as if you were talking to a child, and I promise to give you my best “adult” response. Cosmology and quantum physics are clearly not my fields, but I enjoy clarifying the fraction of phenomena around which I can wrap my brain.

Philip Raymond
CRYPSA.com Co-chair
Cryptocurrency Standards Association