Possibly something related to where GPS data was submitted as evidence.
6
-
2You seem to be aware that GPS requires relativity. There have obviously been plenty of court cases where GPS evidence has been submitted. So from that perspective, there are thousands of cases. But that's rather tautological so I imagine that you have a different question in mind– Justin CaveAug 16 at 4:52
-
1Possibly patent litigation.– ohwillekeAug 16 at 4:54
-
1IIRC there was a question a while ago about time dilation (?or maybe Lorentz contraction?) and how it might affect the legality of speeding tickets. I can't find it, either because it's closed/deleted or I'm mis-remembering but I'll keep looking in case it's relevant.– user35069Aug 16 at 9:44
-
1@Rick I wish I cold say that that one is at Humor SE, but alas we don't have that site yet.– uhohAug 16 at 10:35
-
1@uhoh Found it! Has the defence of 'speed is relative' ever been used in court?– user35069Aug 16 at 21:53
|
Show 1 more comment
1 Answer
You can’t prove a negative, but …
Assuming that the principles of relativity mattered to the outcome of a case (which seems unlikely to start with), the theories are so well established that they will not be matters in dispute. That is, the plaintiff/prosecutor and the defence’s experts will agree on the theory so the court can and will take the theory itself as an agreed fact.
Any dispute will be about measurement, or experimental technique, or precision, not about the theory.
-
I have a hunch that some obscure kerfuffles may exist in the intellectual property regime, somewhere, somehow, of the "you stole my perpetual motion machine idea" variety. This is not an example of a court case, but it is an impossible propulsion scheme based on actually a failure to apply special relativity correctly. Luckily no pattens were harmed in the making thereof. See this answer to Could the helical engine work? I wonder if relativity was ever involved in any Cold Fusion litigation (if there was any)?– uhohAug 16 at 4:50