Minkowski Metric.
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Infinite vs. instant
Next: It's a heatwave
From: Sam Wormley on 13 Jun 2010 21:48 On 6/13/10 6:23 PM, Henry Wilson DSc wrote: > That is probably why I am the only person who contributes any real physics to > this NG. You couldn't solve a undergraduate mechanics problem if your life depended on it. I even question a freshman first year physics problem.
From: Thomas Heger on 14 Jun 2010 00:36 Henry Wilson DSc schrieb: > I would like a relativist to explain why the distance term ct is imaginary in > 4D 'spacetime'. > > Does this imply that the whole theory is just a figment of Einstein's > imagination? > I interpret multiplication with i as an angle of 90� rotation over a plane. Now imagine an axis of such a rotation, standing normal to this plane, than this is 90� up (or i). This is the relation of an inverse between the axis and the plane and a multiplication with i^-1. Now we call the plane spacelike and the axis timelike. The real space we find in between (between i and i ^-1), what is at 45�. This gets real numbers for distances and units of 1. Since the timeline carries the i, we had to multiply -i to get a one (with c=1). TH
From: Henry Wilson DSc on 14 Jun 2010 19:26 On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 20:48:26 -0500, Sam Wormley <swormley1(a)gmail.com> wrote: >On 6/13/10 6:23 PM, Henry Wilson DSc wrote: >> That is probably why I am the only person who contributes any real physics to >> this NG. > > You couldn't solve a undergraduate mechanics problem if your life > depended on it. I even question a freshman first year physics > problem. Wormey, haven't you made a big enough fool of yourself already?Why do you keep making things worse for yourself? Henry Wilson... ........Einstein's Relativity...The religion that worships negative space.
From: eric gisse on 14 Jun 2010 19:29 ...@..(Henry Wilson DSc) wrote: > On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 20:48:26 -0500, Sam Wormley <swormley1(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >>On 6/13/10 6:23 PM, Henry Wilson DSc wrote: >>> That is probably why I am the only person who contributes any real >>> physics to this NG. >> >> You couldn't solve a undergraduate mechanics problem if your life >> depended on it. I even question a freshman first year physics >> problem. > > Wormey, haven't you made a big enough fool of yourself already?Why do you > keep making things worse for yourself? Yeah, like how Sam keeps posting despite everyone knowing he posted forged degrees...oh wait, that was YOU. > > > Henry Wilson... > > .......Einstein's Relativity...The religion that worships negative space.
From: Henry Wilson DSc on 14 Jun 2010 20:03
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 06:36:19 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg(a)web.de> wrote: >Henry Wilson DSc schrieb: >> I would like a relativist to explain why the distance term ct is imaginary in >> 4D 'spacetime'. >> >> Does this imply that the whole theory is just a figment of Einstein's >> imagination? >> > >I interpret multiplication with i as an angle of 90� rotation over a plane. >Now imagine an axis of such a rotation, standing normal to this plane, >than this is 90� up (or i). >This is the relation of an inverse between the axis and the plane and a >multiplication with i^-1. Now we call the plane spacelike and the axis >timelike. >The real space we find in between (between i and i ^-1), what is at 45�. >This gets real numbers for distances and units of 1. >Since the timeline carries the i, we had to multiply -i to get a one >(with c=1). There is no justification for using imaginary numbers. Both x and ct are ordinary Euclidean distances. Therefore x^2 and (ct)^2 are ordinary Euclidean areas. Subtracting the latter from the smaller x^2 produces a negative area. Multiply that by a length and we have a negative volume. > >TH Henry Wilson... ........Einstein's Relativity...The religion that worships negative space. |