Re: Aether is the empty space in which the Universe sits

From: greywolf42 (mingstb_at_marssim-ss.com)
Date: 07/23/04 

Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 10:48:17 -0700

Bill Hobba <bhobba@rubbish.net.au> wrote in message
news:TD_Lc.12231$K53.11933@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "greywolf42" <mingstb@marssim-ss.com> wrote in message
> news:10fvvoe6v36581@corp.supernews.com...
> > Bill Hobba <bhobba@rubbish.net.au> wrote in message
> > news:urFLc.10746$K53.4798@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> > >

{snip higher levels}

> > > It is not magic. It comes from the experimentally verified fact all
> > > fundamental theories we currently know of (including your beloved
> > > Maxwell aether theory) are expressible as lagrangians.
> >
> > And the *reason* that Lagrangians are used, is because Lagrangian
> > formulation is based on physical, Newtonian processes. Not because the
> > word "Lagrangian" has a magical significance.
>
> The reason it is used is that its formalism applies to both particles and
> fields not just particles as does the usual formulation of Newton's 3
> laws.

Formalism is not reality. The reason we selected those particular
formalisms (math equations) is that they describe the physical world due to
Newton's laws. This applies to both fields (Maxwell's EM -- which is based
on Newton's laws) and matter particles (for which Newton's laws were
generated).

> Further it is in that formalism that Noethers theorem becomes relevant and
> we can use the modern definitions of energy momentum etc that require it.

Noether's theorem is not relevant at all. It is a mere theorem, that owes
it's usefulness to the assumptions contained within the postulates of the
Newtonian mechanisms on which it is based.

> > > Noethers theorem is the
> > > logical consequence of that ie every symmetry of the lagrangian must
> > > correspond to a conserved quantity and conversely.
> >
> > Specifically, the converse. Noether's theorem is a result of the
> > assumption of a conservation.
>
> You are mistaken. Noethers theorem states that to each symmetry there
> corresponds a conservation law and to each conservation law there
> corresponds a sentry see
> http://www.fact-index.com/n/no/noether_s_theorem.html. Notice it is To
> every symmetry, there corresponds a conservation law and vice versa.

Sigh. Merely repeating your claim does not advance the argument.
Noether's theorem is derived from underlying assumptions (regardless of what
silliness you've found on the web). It is the underlying assumptions that
control what Noether's theorem is. Not 'vice versa.'

Postulates-to-theorems is a one-way road.

> > > It is a theorem and as such beyond question.
> >
> > There is no assumption, postulate, or theorem that is beyond question.
> > But in this case, it is irrelevant. You seem to want to treat the
> > Lagrangian as 'magic.' Hence Noether inherits the 'magic.'
>
> Then you obviously do not understand mathematics

LOL! What a pathetic special plead.

>- but that is hardly news -
> http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/Position.html.

Now the standard relativist ad hominem.

> A
> theorems conclusion is shown to follow from the riles of logic

A lovely, Freudian typo. It certainly describes logic as you attempt to
apply it. :)

> and its
> premises. To doubt a theorem you need to doubt logic.

LOL! Nonsense. All I have to do is point out either a fallacious
(incorrect) starting assumption, or an error in the specific logic. The
fact that someone *claims* that something is logical, does not make it valid
logic.

> > But the Lagrangian is used because of the physical, Newtonian
> > underpinnings of theory. Not because the Lagrangian is magic.
>
> They are used because physicists realized the central importance of this
> wonderful theorem and that to use it theories should be expressed in
> Lagrangeian formalism.

LOL! The theorem is used because it incorporates the Newtonian formalism in
a nice, easy shortcut fashion. But it is useful, because of the Newtonian
formalism. Now mathematicians (or rather equation-worshippers) like this
approach, because they don't have to understand what's going on. 

--
greywolf42
ubi dubium ibi libertas
{remove planet for return e-mail}

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Aether is the empty space in which the Universe sits
    ... Formalism is not reality. ... Newton's laws. ... Newtonian mechanisms on which it is based. ... > They are used because physicists realized the central importance of this ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: An instructive antenna trick
    ... Newtonian mechanics still rules the universe, ... classical laws of motion break down. ... acted as a wrapper for higher order math around the simple laws that were ... antennas, but I do know this, what we have observed so far about "antenna ...
    (rec.radio.amateur.antenna)
  • Re: Evolution and Observation Gap
    ... you cited Newton's laws as 'proof' that the Sun moves! ... geocentrism and all models of a static Earth. ... The Newtonian theory made heliocentrism much more believable than ... Kepler's mathematical synthesis that solidified the heliocentric worldview. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Newtonian physics derived from P(t)=0=E(t)
    ... It seems to me you understand so little about Newtonian mechanics to be ... exclusively mean the mathematical system based on Newton's Laws, then, we ... contributors to relativity have contributed something fundamental to the ...
    (sci.physics)
Quantcast