Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- From: Shubee <e.Shubee@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 11:28:33 -0700 (PDT)
On Apr 4, 12:31 pm, "Juan R." González-Álvarez
<juan...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Shubee wrote on Fri, 04 Apr 2008 07:34:41 -0700:
Juan,
Lorentz invariance is an extraordinarily beautiful concept in physical
theory.
Beauty is a relative concept. One may call "beauty" other may name "ugly".
And in the end *experiment* is the judge in science. It has no importance
how 'beauty' anyone believes his theory is but it fails to explain data.
How is it that professional physicists today can't find Lorentz
invariant expressions as easily as Poincaré did in 1905?
Fail to understant that are you asking for.
Poincaré lists 8 distinct but elementary invariants in his paper. See
the equation numbers 5 and 7 in http://www.univ-nancy2.fr/poincare/bhp/pdf/hp2007gg.pdf
How many invariants in special relativity are you aware of? How many
distinct invariants of the Poincaré group exist? This is how
mathematicians measure the understanding of physicists in spacetime.
I quote:
"Every geometry is defined by a group of transformations, and the goal
of every geometry is to study invariants of this group." Klein,
Erlanger Program.
"Each type of geometry is the study of the invariants of a group of
transformations; that is, the symmetry transformation of some chosen
space." Stewart and Golubitsky 1993, p. 44.
"A geometry is defined by a group of transformations, and investigates
everything that is invariant under the transformations of this given
group." Weyl 1952, p. 133.
"The geometry of Minkowski space is defined by the Poincaré group."
http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/generalized.htm
Shubee
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- From: Juan R.
- Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- From: Juan R.
- Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- From: Shubee
- Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- From: Juan R.
- Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- From: Shubee
- Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- From: Juan R.
- Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- From: Shubee
- Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- From: Juan R.
- Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- From: Shubee
- Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- From: Juan R.
- Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- From: Shubee
- Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- From: Juan R.
- Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- Prev by Date: Re: Is there an equivalence principle for space and time?
- Next by Date: Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- Previous by thread: Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- Next by thread: Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|