Re: GR ?


"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:vDYze.29292$oJ.13176@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
| "Significant Zero" <paulpsremove@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| news:1120901128.24485.0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > 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?
|
| If what you are trying to say is do gravitational fields have energy -
then
| I would say yes with caveats. Energy in GR is a rather slippery concept
due
| to the fact that energy is the conserved Noether charge related to time
| symmetry of the lagrangian - it is rather difficult to define such when
that
| symmetry is lacking due to space-time curvature - see the FAQ -

Thanks Bill that is the energy definition that I have some disagreement with
and to a large degree is what much of my postings are in dispute with and
are grouping for a more complete, accurate and satisfying definition. My
position is that all energy is a function of relative states of length and
time deformation with the use of the word deformation not implying that any
intrinsic force is present in this deformation. The energy being present due
to the relationship of different length/duration states which from your
previous posting I thing you violently oppose {:-) .

| http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/GR/energy_gr.html
|

Maybe I don't understand this but it seems to me to have more conceptual
holes than a
moth eaten jumper but if you are prepared to pick it to bits with me I'll
give it a try, you may be able to educate me out of my dispute but I am hard
to educate about something that is itself in dispute.{:-)

| Bill
|
| >
| > --
| > Significant Zero E-field = Electric field, M-field =Magnetic field,
two
| > unbound field effects
| > http://home.freeuk.com/paulps/
| > Maybe updates. The spuds, beans and onions are coming up nicely. Ooh
| > ah.{:-)
| >
| >
|
|



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: GR ?
    ... > |> Would anybody that understands GR dispute the statement that the ... > |> of mass and that this deformation has the aspect and equivalence to ... > | If what you are trying to say is do gravitational fields have energy - ... > Thanks Bill that is the energy definition that I have some disagreement ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Vibration damping
    ... Dan Connelly wrote: ... >> The elastomer does not absorb energy if it does not deform. ... > the deformation magnitude is less: deformation at a given energy density is ...
    (rec.bicycles.tech)
  • Re: To you physicists -
    ... >> or velocity through impact would be counter productive as ... >> some of that work will be in deformation so it won't directly ... >> tell you about ball velocity. ... > Then deformation isn't potential energy? ...
    (rec.sport.golf)
  • Re: Why does measuring tape bend one way?
    ... >> Why does metal measuring tape easily bend one way but not the other? ... In the classical analysis of a column failing under compression ... slight curve with the energy released by the compressive force ... moving as the deformation allows the force to move. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Using nuclear power to make renewables and a hydrogen economy cost effective
    ... >> between the exhaust and the rocket accordiing to Newtons third law. ... >> apply it to dispute the equal and opposite reaction forces. ... > Forces are not energy. ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)