What are space and time?
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Quantum Gravity 400.5: Why is P(B) or P(AB) = 2P(A) - 1 Optimal Rather than nP(A) - 1, n > 2?
Next: Quantum Gravity 400.6: Mechanical Advantage in Terms of Force, Distances, Probabilities
From: jmfbahciv on 26 Jul 2010 09:05 John Stafford wrote: > In article <PM00048C36830E5A2E(a)aca211af.ipt.aol.com>, > jmfbahciv <See.above(a)aol.com> wrote: > >> [spit a newsgroup] >> >> John Stafford wrote: >> >> <snip> >> >> > I found a photo in Roger Penrose's _ Emperor's New Mind_, page 564 in >> > our library copy. It is early, and different from the later >> > representations. If you surf for "penrose aluminum-manganese alloy" >> > (sans quotes), you should come up with some good information. >> > >> > I struggle to follow Penrose, but that's my shortcoming. He's a very >> > good instructor and writer. >> >> I never made it through the third chapter of that book; it always >> ended up being thrown against the wall. Some day I'll try to >> read it again. >> >> /BAH > > I had a similar reaction to Tipler's _Omega Point_. Somewhere past the > center of the book he wrote, "Now I ask the reader to suspend > disbelief". I threw it out on the lawn and emptied a shotgun into it, > and followed with 7 .45 ACP rounds. Then I sent the book to my Brother > (a publisher) as a review. He sent it back to be signed! I am able to suspend disbelief. I am unable to condone fairy tales first thing to prepare in making a point, especially in a book aimed at an inexperienced audience. Hadn't heard of _Omega Point_ so I can't tell if you're kooky :-). > > (No worries folks, I lived so far from civilization nobody heard the > shots - so just imagine they never occurred.) /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 26 Jul 2010 09:05 Vladimir Kirov wrote: > > jmfbahciv: >> [spit a newsgroup] >> >> Vladimir Kirov wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > I consider that space - nonconstant ensemble. >> > Term a space-time is error since space bound with time and time is >> > part of space. Nonpossible to visualize the space without time and >> > time without space. >> > >> > With respekt! >> > >> Oh, good grief. The term space-time implies a geometry which is >> not Euclidean. >> >> /BAH > > If space to separate of time that this will already non space, but > statistical ensemble, to which possible add time. > > Euclidean geometry adds as in c^2=a^2+b^2 The geometry used in space-time subtracts. Lorentz geometry. Read the first 5 sections of _Space-time Physics_ by Taylor and Wheeler. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 26 Jul 2010 09:05 Vladimir Kirov wrote: > > > jmfbahciv: > >> wrote: >> The term space-time implies a geometry which is >> not Euclidean. >> >> /BAH > > This well all known. Apparently not. > But this nothing non changes. > How do you figure? The methods of calculation are done differently. If you don't know how to calculate, you won't be able to do accurate predictions. If you were aiming at Mars or the TV screen, you had better be able to aim based on that geometry and not 2-D geometry. hmmm...[perturbed emoticon here] those TVs are going to be forgotten tecnology just like telephones which have a dial. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 26 Jul 2010 09:05 Day Brown wrote: > On 07/23/2010 05:42 PM, Tim Golden BandTech.com wrote: >> Correspondence to observed behavior is the crux. We really do observe >> three dimensional space, from within a cartesian mathematical system >> of real valued coordinates. Somehow within these higher theories they >> need to yield this. Most string theory as I understand it only does >> this manually, rather than deriving it. Some quantum gravity folks >> want an emergent spacetime. >> >> Ordinary theory does not pose the problem >> Why spacetime? >> and instead manually doles it out. The idea that there should be a >> reason why has gone unaddressed within most analyses. Standard (x,y,z) >> physics is not arbitrarily chosen. The addition to time- well, it is >> not symmetrical to x,y,and z so the 4D tensor representation is >> slightly wrong. > That certainly makes sense to my mind. But I dunno that it will apply to > minds, intelligence networks, or whatever, whose powers are greater. > > I've also seen reports of minds that simply cannot entertain certain > ideas; most obvious with the neurotically delusional, but also in group > think such as partisan politics. I cant preclude the Hand of Fate from > manipulating the string theory in my mind, pulling some to bring certain > ideas up from the depths, or breaking some to let others sink into oblivion. > > Just cause I cant deal with more than 3 dimensions dont mean there is > not an integrative power which could, and when it does, Murphy's laws is > one of the results as is de Jevu. I spoze there may be other effects I > am not aware of. If you want to get a taste of awareness, watch _The Mechanical Universe_ TV series. It spends some time on explaining this stuff and tries to make pictures so you can "see" how space-time is used. /BAH
From: Vladimir Kirov on 26 Jul 2010 09:51
jmfbahciv: > Vladimir Kirov wrote: > > > > > > jmfbahciv: > > > >> wrote: > >> The term space-time implies a geometry which is > >> not Euclidean. > >> > >> /BAH > > > > This well all known. > > Apparently not. > > > But this nothing non changes. > > > > How do you figure? The methods of calculation > are done differently. If you don't know how > to calculate, you won't be able to do accurate > predictions. If you were aiming at Mars or > the TV screen, you had better be able to aim > based on that geometry and not 2-D geometry. > > > hmmm...[perturbed emoticon here] those TVs > are going to be forgotten tecnology just like > telephones which have a dial. > > /BAH ÐÑбое пÑоÑÑÑанÑÑво - ÑÑо неÑÑаÑиÑеÑкое множеÑÑво, а знаÑÐ¸Ñ Ð¼Ð½Ð¾Ð¶ÐµÑÑво, изменÑемое во вÑемени. 3D-пÑоÑÑÑанÑÑво без вÑемени не ÑвлÑеÑÑÑ Ð¿ÑоÑÑÑанÑÑвом, а множеÑÑвом, заданÑм в ÐекаÑÑовÑÑ ÐºÐ¾Ð¾ÑдинаÑÐ°Ñ . Any space is a nonstatic set, so the set changed in time. The 3D-space without time is not space, and set, given in Cartesian co-ordinates. |