"None" <selftrans@yandex.ru> wrote in message 
news:1122891348.965195.196010@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> All postulates, or rather principles, which I accept, as you said, are
> the principles of classical physics. Einstein himself denied the
> postulates of GR.

References please.

> And the postulate of physical laws equivalency in inertial
> and non-inertial frames on which GR is based is a groundless
> stupidity.

They have never been experimentally refuted.

> I do not suggest people to choose.

Sure.  And it might be an idea to back up your assertions with experimental 
evidence instead of just saying it is stupid or whatever.

Bill

> This is the right of
> each. Only they may not offend after that all constructions like
> relativistic will be crumbled to nothing in the first touch of logic of
> classical phenomenology of physical processes. ;-)
>
> If speaking of my propositions, we have them five full volumes of
> original studies without repetitions. The fact that colleagues in
> newsgroups are able in respond only to bleat as rams or to swear as
> cobblers, changes nothing, but makes senseless my attempt to answer
> your question more completely. ;-) If I see a serious approach, I will
> reply more seriously. ;-) In brief - read SELF Transactions:
>
> http://selftrans.narod.ru/cover/cover.html
>
> Sergey
>