Re: invariance of negative signature of the metric?

On Mar 12, 11:44 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" <dynam...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 12, 2:47 pm, stevendaryl3...@xxxxxxxxx (Daryl McCullough)
wrote:



Ken S. Tucker says...

On Mar 12, 6:12 am, stevendaryl3...@xxxxxxxxx (Daryl McCullough)
wrote:
I'm sure that it's possible to work perfectly well with
complex coordinates.

That's what a (+---) signature is.

No, it's not.

But the notion of a metric "signature"
only makes sense if the coordinates are real.

I don't know what "makes sense" means, but
I prefer to use a (++++) signature BUT that's
choice not a physical law of nature.

But the claim that spacetime has the metric (+---)
(or equivalently) (-+++) *is* a physical fact about
the universe. It's a very important fact, and it
makes for a big difference between spacelike and
timelike separations.

You have the right to believe that "claim".
In GR it's an arbituary choice, as I proved.

Of course it is an arbitrary choice. That's the whole fucking point of
the thread. However you proved nothing except that you don't know what
you are talking about.

Regards
Ken S. Tucker

--
Daryl McCullough
Ithaca, NY

.

Quantcast