Re: Nikola Tesla about Relativity

Koobee Wublee, the barbie booblee:
>
>"JanPB" <filmart@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>news:1136405610.048421.140160@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Koobee Wublee wrote:
>>> "Bill Hobba" <rubbish@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>> news:rTptf.146582$V7.68776@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>> > GR is logically consistent.
>>>
>>> But GR is built on faulty assumptions which are glorified to postulates.
>>
>> They are logically self-consistent and as faulty as those of any other
>> good physical theory. Experimental results have the final say.
>
>What do you mean self-consistent?

Here on earth, self-consistent means the assumptions don't contradict
each other.

>As far as I know, GR is as
>self-consistent as those of any other good physical theories. Experimental
>results helps the validity of a theory a lot, yes, but only after key
>derivations resulting in such predictions are cleverly misrepresented.

Since no representation regarding you being able to understand
the theory has ever been made, cleverness was not necessary.

[...]
>> No, it's not. All GR says is that at at every point in space and at
>> every instant there is a persistent correlation between energy-momentum
>> flux density and certain combination of Ricci and scalar curvatures.
>> But "correlation does not imply causation" as they say is statistics.
>> It might be that both energy-momentum and spacetime curvature are a
>> result of some third, yet undetected, quantity - hence the apparent
>> causal link.
>
>Hey, the whole crap about GR started with Hilbert writing down an abstract
>action that amounts to no real physical meaning.

Physical meaning requires physical input. You would first have to
understand the abstractions before you would understand the physical
input.

[...]

>The field equations are extremely sensitive to what type of Lagrangian
>provided. Changing Hilbert's Lagrangian slightly would result a very
>different set of field equations. For example, Dicke's.

Obviously one can always force the lagrangian to be something that
doesn't work. What's your point?

Changing the electromagnetic lagrangian would result in field equations
that differ from maxwell's equations, but you don't seem to arguing that
maxwell's equations are wrong because the electromagnetic lagrangian
is sensitive to similar ``small changes.''

>Thus, without Hilbert's Lagrangian, there is no GR. His Lagrangian is based
>on the assumption that spacetime must be curved.

Does that mean that without the electromagnetic lagrangian, there
could be no maxwell equations? Let us know so we can stop giving
maxwell credit if necessary.

>The field equations, of
>course, yield several constants. So, again by very conveniently and
>cleverly assigning these constants, GR encompasses Newtonian physics.

Yes, it was very clever to develop a theory that is consistent
with the existing theory and data. That makes it really tough for
those like yourself who would prefer to weigh in with wishful
thinking.

>It is no wonder that GR explains Newtonian physics at all, duh!
>The same circular creative thinking helps GR to predict the observations.

Most scientists regard agreement between theory and experiment and
previous theories to be an example of consistency. Your examples of
original thinking indicate that you conflate originality with being
wrong.

[...]


>> Principle of least action is not just about least time. I think you are
>> the one being plagued.
>
>I do understand the principle of least action does not necessarily indicatie
>that the elapsed time represents the least action.

Elapsed _proper_ time, which is anffine parameter, not the coordinate
time.

>However, the geodesics must obey the least time principle. I am afraid
>you are the one who is plagued.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Nikola Tesla about Relativity
    ... >>> Thus, without Hilbert's Lagrangian, there is no GR. ... GR encompasses Newtonian physics. ... >where the field equations were very close to the modern day form. ... mathematician and provided the mathematical knowledge. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: From Maximal Entropy Random Walk to Quantum Thermodynamics
    ... understanding physics, the possibility that it could be logical, ... Lagrangian mechanics of some field --- fully governed by concrete ... First, you assume that trajectories are deterministic, but this is ...
    (sci.physics.research)
  • Re: Nikola Tesla about Relativity
    ... > variations and principle of least action embodied by the lagrangian, ... The wire rotates around the vertical with angular ... Field equations are a subject of GR, but not the the way around. ... > derived the field equations in the pedestrian fashion used by physicists. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Difference between predictions of SR and LET - perhaps!
    ... Lagrange equations from a Lagrangian in research papers, ... My "blathering about Noether" has nothing to do with Killing vectors. ... Derive the field equations from the Lagrangian. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Why strings are required to halt collapse (was: black holes and singularities)
    ... was in fact *not* a fair assessment of the whole field of physics. ... > objects are permitted by the field equations. ... Well, I think singularities, breakdown of geometry, break- ... interested in philosophy. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)