Re: Comparisons between SR and LET.
- From: dralexgreen@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 3 May 2005 05:10:23 -0700
The maths tells us that whether or not Euclid's fifth postulate applies
to our world then the world must be described by some form of geometry
that was not invisaged by Euclid - it would either be mathematically
Euclidean with a fourth dimension measured in units of sqrt -1 or
non-Euclidean. What it cannot be is Euclidean and 3D (with 3 real
spatial dimensions).
The issue of the propagation of light is a different issue from the
correctness of SR. As it turns out the SR theory of em shows that light
propagation in vaccuo should be 'c', the conversion factor in four
dimensional space-time from seconds to metres. However, if photons had
some small rest mass or interacted with some strange component of the
vacuum then the speed of light might differ from the universal constant
'c'. 'c' would still exist however but would not apply to light in
vacuo in all circumstances.
Best Wishes
Alex Green
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Comparisons between SR and LET.
- From: Harry
- Re: Comparisons between SR and LET.
- References:
- Re: Comparisons between SR and LET.
- From: dralexgreen
- Re: Comparisons between SR and LET.
- From: Harry
- Re: Comparisons between SR and LET.
- From: dralexgreen
- Re: Comparisons between SR and LET.
- From: Harry
- Re: Comparisons between SR and LET.
- Prev by Date: Beam me up - trying to get a basic understanding of GR
- Next by Date: Re: O'Barr comments (globarr):
- Previous by thread: Re: Comparisons between SR and LET.
- Next by thread: Re: Comparisons between SR and LET.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|