Re: On the GP-B & LIGO

On Mar 28, 1:37 am, "Ken S. Tucker" <dynam...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 27, 4:53 pm, "JanPB" <film...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mar 25, 5:54 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" <dynam...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
...
There's only a few fucking guys on the whole
planet who understand tensor analysis applied
to GR, let's see who they are.

Oh dear. Let me guess: you have finally managed to understand
something of tensor analysis and you now assume that everyone else is
in the same boat: just barely holding onto some understanding.

That's about the size of it.

Let's do simple math.
Let an electrostatic potential be q/r.
In continuum theory d/dr (q/r) is an
E-field, (single source particle).

No, Ken. The field due to a potential is -grad(V). You are off by a
sign and aren't including direction.

What is /\q//\r ? (incremental variations).
What is d/dr (/\q//\r)?
What is /\//\r (/\q//\r)?
The "/\" is a quantum requirement.

This is gibberish without context, Ken.

Were you trying to write /_\ - as in the regular calculus
differential? Did you mean the wedge product? Are you obliquely
referencing the uncertainty principle? Did you mean to say something
else? Do you even know what you mean?


Next care to solve the above in a generally
covariant format?

Neat! Your gibberish isn't even self-consistent. You mention 'quantum'
then a short time later 'covariant'. There is no covariant formulation
of quantum mechanics, Ken.


Do you Jan or anyone else know how to
solve that "simple" problem?

Do you even know what you are asking?

Moving the above incrementals into a
General Covariant form is equivalent to creating
a Quantized Tensor Analysis, (QTA).

A bold step! Transforming gibberish into word salad, that.


What logic power is derived from QTA?

I can unify the amount of angels that can dance on the head of a pin
with the unicorn density of antineutrinos contained within the crank
case of a VW bug.


Maybe if the buck is your quantum, you'd
make Bill Gates look like a peasant.
Regards
Ken


.