2. It is not actually about the long and painful history of time. In fact, it barely touches on history at all.
3. Some of the things it says are flat-out wrong. For example, "How long does it take the earth to face the Sun at the same angle? This simple question has a definite and fairly simple scientific answer..." No, it doesn't. It's not even a constant.
9 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 26.7 ms ] threadThis has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
1. It contains no references.
2. It is not actually about the long and painful history of time. In fact, it barely touches on history at all.
3. Some of the things it says are flat-out wrong. For example, "How long does it take the earth to face the Sun at the same angle? This simple question has a definite and fairly simple scientific answer..." No, it doesn't. It's not even a constant.
https://explainingscience.org/2015/08/24/september-18-the-sh...
4. This is the only work the author ever published (he died in 2009).
So... if you read this and wondered why anyone should care, your puzzlement is well-founded.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time
There are 113 references, those should keep you busy for a while.