Re: To the idiot Eric Gisse, who can't deliver even the simplest problem result

From: eleaticus (eleaticus_at_bellsouth.net)
Date: 10/04/04 

Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 14:57:16 -0500

"rsm109@york.ac.uk" <rob.sm109@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:bbe2bd28.0410040434.2606db9@posting.google.com...
> "eleaticus" <eleaticus@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:<jmZ7d.102684$as2.79628@bignews3.bellsouth.net>...
>
> > Where am I wrong? This inquiring mind wants to know.
>
> You haven't transformed the p term. Since p_u are covariant vector
> components, they aren't invariant under the transformation.

A. I already have the Monday ... not 'challenge' but ...piece underway in
which I am asking for any example of equations in which a coordinate is
xformed under the L-Ex in which you didn't have fiddle/screw around with
other terms of the equation. Can't be done, of course.

B. In the problem posed to me the terms with p_u were said to be invariant.
> (1) p_u x^u is invariant and (2) p_u A^u = 0 independent of your choice
of coordinates

C. My guess is you are asserting some SR-consequence of L-E xforms, wherein
anytime you change a coordinate you have to wave your hands to justify
screwing with other terms in an expression.The 'covariance' is a function
of the consequences of the L-E xforms, right?

The galilean coordinate xforms require no such screwing around.

Remember, it is the invariance of the equation under the xforms that is
under discussion. Nothing else. Once that question is resolved THEN other
considerations can and should be brought up.

D. It is well known - except by SR cultists - that under galilean
translations and rigid rotations there is no change in distances. The
equation given is based on distance, with regular changes over distance. It
would highly moronic to expect that unchangeable distance in a distance
formula changes results.

E. It is rather moronic to use a coordinate as a standin for distance: look
at what it has done to you, imagining that a non-changing distance changes
an equation by not changing. Just use something like Dx,Dy,Dz to represent
distances. Put as A^u = e^u\exp(-i p_u Dx^u) it would take some great
ignoramous to imagine non-invariance.

F. p_u x^u modelled as p_u (x1-x0)^u is obviously invariant under the xforms
I gave because with x=(x1-x0) we have

     p_u x^u = p_u (x1-x0)^u
     p_u x'^u = p_u (x1'-x0')^u
                    = p_u (x1-ut - x0 +ut)^u
                    = p_u (x1-x0)^u
                    = p_u x^u

So, no problem in that because p_u needs no change because nothing else has
actuallt changed. The x term is a distance term and using the galilean
xforms on the difference form shows there is no distance change.

G. If p_u is not so invariant under the coordinate translation then they can
be expressed in coordinate terms, in which case they can be modelled to be
shown as invariant.

H. Invariance: same form, same value in both systems. In the case of the
difference form, reducing not to just the same form but to the same
coordinates. Just how does the 'covariance' effect those criteria in this
case?

I. Without a rotation are not all directionally based non-x,y,z vectors
invariant under rigid galilean translation? Of course. So nothing besides
the distance standins need to be changed under a galilean xform, and when
that is done on the distance form that actually works udner xform, the
distance standins don't change.

Innyhoo, thanks for inserting consequences of the L-E mess into a galilean
xform discussion!

Although I am sure that was Bilge's corrupt intent. Where 'corrupt' means
as intellectually dishonest as in all other posts to me.

eleaticus

Relevant Pages

  • Re: To the idiot Eric Gisse, who cant deliver even the simplest problem result
    ... In the problem posed to me the terms with p_u were said to be invariant. ... My guess is you are asserting some SR-consequence of L-E xforms, ... The galilean coordinate xforms require no such screwing around. ... equation given is based on distance, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: To the idiot Eric Gisse, who cant deliver even the simplest problem result
    ... In the problem posed to me the terms with p_u were said to be invariant. ... My guess is you are asserting some SR-consequence of L-E xforms, ... The galilean coordinate xforms require no such screwing around. ... equation given is based on distance, ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Feynmans fallacy
    ... Voyager effect would imply entraining a particular view with the sun so we ... > invariant, but local invariance can be centered at any ... > WRT cosmological distance. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Feynmans fallacy
    ... Voyager effect would imply entraining a particular view with the sun so we ... > invariant, but local invariance can be centered at any ... > WRT cosmological distance. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Feynmans fallacy
    ... Voyager effect would imply entraining a particular view with the sun so we ... > invariant, but local invariance can be centered at any ... > WRT cosmological distance. ...
    (sci.astro)