Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
NCTM or The Math Forum.


Math Forum
»
Discussions
»
sci.math.*
»
sci.math
Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.
Topic:
Relativity in Two Postulates
Replies:
12
Last Post:
Mar 6, 2013 2:13 PM




Re: Relativity in Two Postulates
Posted:
Feb 22, 2013 2:24 AM


On Feb 21, 4:53 pm, xxein <xxe...@comcast.net> wrote: > On Feb 20, 2:36 am, Koobee Wubleewrote:
> > The constancy in the observed speed of light came from Voigt who > > discovered the Voigt transform being the earlier nonGalilean > > transform that satisfy the null results of the MMX. <shrug> > > > This has a lot of implications. The most overlooked one is the flat > > space ego where every observer will always observe his space to be > > flat even if his space appears and is observed to be hopelessly curved > > by someone else. Thus, the curvature of space is a relative > > comparison in concept. It all results in Voigt?s wisdom. <shrug> > > > >  gravity equivalent to acceleration > > > The principle of equivalence was a Galilean discovery where the > > Newtonian law of gravity becomes ever possible. So, this is not part > > of core curriculum of relativity. It is merely a principle in > > tradition. Without the principle of equivalence, Newtonian law of > > gravity would not be possible. There is no big deal in the principle > > of equivalence. However, when Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, > > and the liar finally understood the simple Newtonian law of gravity, > > the nitwit managed to reverseengineer the Newtonian law of gravity > > and since then had proclaimed the principle of equivalence as his own > > basic organic discovery. What an insult to scholars of history if you > > ask Koobee Wublee. <shrug> > > > The most basic tensor is the Riemann curvature tensor which has > > nothing to do with Riemann himself. Looking for how an object is able > > to move through perceived curved space, Christoffel trivially derived > > the geodesic equations. From the geodesic equations, Ricci saw and > > defined an operator that results in null 4velocity. Through double > > application of this manmade operator, now called the covariant > > derivative, a 4x4x4x4 (complete with 256 elements) matrix can be > > fudged in which Ricci who named it the Riemann tensor. Arbitrarily > > realizing 256 elements to a matrix is hopelessly useless. Ricci?s > > student, LeviCivita, condenses the 4dimental Riemann tensor into a 2 > > dimensional one which is now called the Ricci tensor with any > > scientific justifications. The whole tensor business of things is an > > idol of voodoo cult in practice. <shrug> > > xxein: I might as well ask. What do you base your knowledge of the > physic upon?
Years of study just like what Tom requests all to do, of course. Textbooks as well as what are beyond the textbooks. <shrug>
> Um. Without namedropping. Or as Sgt. Joe Friday > (badge 714) would say "just the physic, m'am".
What is that again? You still make no sense after all these years. <shrug>



