Spaces: Logic and illogic in SRT / GRT. (2)
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Substance overcomes many of the drawbacks of previous catalysts
Next: Chapter 4 : galactic density and distribution; #42; ATOM TOTALITY
From: sadovnik socratus on 29 Apr 2010 01:12 Spaces: Logic and illogic in SRT / GRT. (2) ===============. Minkowski (1908): " the views of space and time that I wish to lay before you have sprung from the soil of experimental physics and therein lies their strength. They are radical. Henceforth space by itself, and time by itself are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality." ========. My comment. 1 The space by itself, and time by itself are the conditions which we can see on our and another planets. 2 What is "a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality." (-4D) ? It is flat negative space without Gravity (-4D ). - 4D is Space between billion and billion stars and galactic. The whole mass of these billion and billion stars and galactic are very few. They cannot produce effect of Gravity in the whole Universe. These masses can produce effect of Gravity only in the small, local part of the whole Universe. - 4D is the Vacuum (spacetime). Vacuum is some kind of Energy space in the condition T=0K. # The book: Albert Einstein and the Cosmic World Order / Six lectures delivered at the University of Michigan in the Spring of 1962 / by Cornelius Lanczos ==========. In the lecture No. 6. Lanczos wrote; when Minkowski gave his interpretation SRT was become clear, that realization the theory in the physical conceptions was impossible. The SRT is rather geometrical than physical phenomenon; and it must be explain on geometrical language, and not on language of physics. So wrote Cornelius Lanczos, who served as assistant to Einstein during the period 1928-29. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornelius_Lanczos And from 1908, from one generation to other pass this thought; If you want to understand physics you must know mathematics. And if you cannot understand the beauty of SRT mathematics you cannot be physicist. And it isn't necessary to explain SRT in physical conceptions. If the practical result confirms good with math conclusion - it is enough. Do you say the theory look strange, paradoxical? Not for us - mathematicians. ( !) # And more than 100 years this idea manages scientist's brain. It is prohibit, it is taboo to image SRT ( -4D) as a real process, which can be explain by ordinary language. Maybe we need other 100 years to pass this taboo. ==========. Best wishes. Israel Sadovnik. Socratus. ================. |