Re: Minkowski Metric
- From: stevendaryl3016@xxxxxxxxx (Daryl McCullough)
- Date: 15 Jan 2007 07:24:57 -0800
John C. Polasek says...
I don't need gij or dij to make a scalar quadratic product.
On the contrary, you certainly do. Let me give you an example:
Suppose that (in 2D Euclidean space) that I tell you that there
are two nearby points A and B. The coordinates of A are (A^1, A^2).
The coordinates of B are (B^1, B^2). What is the distance
between A and B?
That's simple: Let V be the vector with components V^1 = B^1 - A^1
and V^2 = B^2 - A^2. Then the distance is just given by
That shows how fuzzy your thinking is. B1 - A1 is just a number and
you can't make a vector V1 out of it.
D = square-root(V . V)
There are no V's
V is the displacement vector going from point A to point B.
where . indicates the scalar product. So what is D in terms ofNo D^2 equals [a1 a2] row vector times [B1 B2] columnvec =
V^1 and V^2? Presumably you think it is
D = square-root((V^1 * V^1) + (V^2 * V^2))
a1b1 + a2b2. Take the square root
You are saying that the distance from A to B is equal to
square-root(a1 b1 + a2 b2)?
That doesn't make any sense. Let's look at a particular
concrete example: In Cartesian coordinates in Euclidean
space, A is the point with x-coordinate 1 and y-coordinate
0. B is the point with x-coordinate 0 and y-coordinate 1.
What is the distance between A and B? Your formula gives
D = square-root(a1 b1 + a2 b2)
= square-root(1 * 0 + 0 * 1)
= 0
So the distance between those points is *zero*? You must
first take the displacement vector, which is the vector
V with x-component V^1 = b1 - a1 = -1, and with y-component
V^2 = b2 - a2 = +1. Then the distance is
D = square-root((V^1)*(V^1) + (V^2)*(V^2))
= square-root((-1)*(-1) + 1 * 1)
= square-root(2)
So did you make a typo, or are you really unable to compute
distances in Cartesian coordinates?
--
Daryl McCullough
Ithaca, NY
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Minkowski Metric
- From: John C . Polasek
- Re: Minkowski Metric
- References:
- Re: Minkowski Metric
- From: John C . Polasek
- Re: Minkowski Metric
- From: Daryl McCullough
- Re: Minkowski Metric
- From: John C . Polasek
- Re: Minkowski Metric
- Prev by Date: Re: The Absurd Claim of the Metric as a Tensor
- Next by Date: Re: The IRT transform equations
- Previous by thread: Re: Minkowski Metric
- Next by thread: Re: Minkowski Metric
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|