Re: GR ?
- From: Tom Roberts <tjroberts@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 03:34:52 GMT
Significant Zero wrote:
Would anybody that understands GR dispute the statement that the geometry of GR is non-Euclidean due deformation of length and duration under presence of mass and that this deformation has the aspect and equivalence to energy?
You have too many unacknowledged puns in there for your statement to make sense (e.g. on "deformation", "length", "duration", ...). And there are undefined phrases in there, too ("deformation of length and duration", "presence of mass", "aspect and equivalence to energy").
In GR there is a definite relationship between the metric of spacetime and the energy-momentum tensor of matter. The metric determines the geometry, and the energy-momentum tensor is the density of mass, energy, and momentum in spacetime. But note there are manifolds in GR that have curvature but no mass (e.g. the electrovacuum manifolds, the gravitational-wave manifolds, the geon manifolds, etc.).
I think your statement is headed in the right direction, but is phrased too poorly to know for sure.
As J.A.Wheeler said, "Space tells matter how to move, and matter tells space how to curve." But like most sound bites this is not a precise statement of GR.
Tom Roberts tjroberts@xxxxxxxxxx .
- References:
- GR ?
- From: Significant Zero
- GR ?
- Prev by Date: Re: Question about light clock - Part II
- Next by Date: Re: GR ?
- Previous by thread: Re: GR ?
- Next by thread: Re: GR ?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading