What are space and time?
in [Math]
|
Prev: andre@moorelife.nl
Next: get cancer and die, musacunt
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: 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.
From: Vladimir Kirov on 26 Jul 2010 10:09 jmfbahciv: > 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 If in Euclidean space there is no time is a set. But time is present, but it not formal in definition, and is shown at operations on set. We take, for example, space of names. In definition space time is absent, but at operations on set it is quite defined in force determinations spaces. So if we speak the space-time, that imply that beside this space 2 time.
From: jmfbahciv on 27 Jul 2010 08:37 Vladimir Kirov wrote: > > jmfbahciv: >> 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 > > If in Euclidean space there is no time is a set. > But time is present, but it not formal in definition, and is shown at > operations on set. > We take, for example, space of names. In definition space time is > absent, but at operations on set it is quite defined in force > determinations spaces. > > So if we speak the space-time, that imply that beside this space 2 > time. > I'm having trouble understanding what you wrote. Geometries have a set of axioms and are built based on those axioms. Space-time uses a geometry which has an axiom which is different from Euclidean geometory. The reason Lorentz geometry was created is because it's more useful than Euclidean geometry to do certain things, e.g. relativity calculations and predictions. Are you interested in reading the first 5 sections of _Space-time Physics_ to see how that geometry is used? /BAH
From: Tim Golden BandTech.com on 28 Jul 2010 06:50
On Jul 24, 9:31 am, Vladimir Kirov <vldmr....(a)gmail.com> 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! What about isotropic behavior Vladimir? |