Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
Drexel University or The Math Forum.
|
|
|
|
Re: Is every physical property relative?
Posted:
Dec 15, 2012 4:12 PM
|
|
Victor Porton wrote:
> From my blog:
>
> http://portonmath.wordpress.com/2012/12/15/complete-relativity-theory/
>
> Disclaimer: I am not a physicist.
>
> Einstein has discovered that some physical properties are relative.
>
> In this blog post I present the conjecture that essentially all physical
> properties are relative. I do not formulate exact details of this theory,
> a thing which could be measurable, but just a broad class of specific
> theories. Nevertheless the theory which I formulate in this blog post is
> mathematically exact.
>
> Let P is the set of (relative) physical properties. We will make L into
> poset by the order of which properties are more relative and which are
> less relative. (With the axiom that less relative properties may be always
> restored knowing more relative properties.)
Typo: L -> P
> Consider the filter F characterizing positive infinity (that is infinitely
> least relative properties) on the poset P.
>
> My conjecture: The only really existing (non-relative) physical properties
> are values of relative properties on the filter F.
>
> Formally: The only really existing physical object is a monovalued reloid*
> whose domain is the filter F.
>
> My theory may become into something verifiable by experiment if someone
> specifies what is F exactly.
>
> * "reloid" is defined in my math research:
> http://www.mathematics21.org/algebraic-general-topology.html
>
--
Victor Porton - http://www.mathematics21.org
|
|
|
|
