Discrete Space vs. Minkowsk's Spacetime
From: Jack Martinelli (jack_at_martinelli.org)
Date: 03/20/05
- Next message: cnctutwiler_at_wmconnect.com: "Re: Fraud in sciences, fraud in mathematics"
- Previous message: Nick: "Re: Photon Duality (Feynman doesn't know why, do you?)"
- Next in thread: Uncle Al: "Re: Discrete Space vs. Minkowsk's Spacetime"
- Reply: Uncle Al: "Re: Discrete Space vs. Minkowsk's Spacetime"
- Reply: Nick: "Re: Discrete Space vs. Minkowsk's Spacetime"
- Reply: zzbunker_at_netscape.net: "Re: Discrete Space vs. Minkowsk's Spacetime"
- Reply: GR_GR: "Re: Discrete Space vs. Minkowsk's Spacetime"
- Reply: Alex: "Re: Discrete Space vs. Minkowsk's Spacetime"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 03:03:34 GMT
I prefer discrete space over Minkowski's 4-D space-time.
Discrete space pros:
1. Time emerges naturally as an observable (as does mass). (I.e., neither
are meta-physical)
2. There is a natural 1:1 correspondence of "frame" / "space-object" and
quantum. (Particles are compact topologies.)
3. The laws of physics (Newton's anyway & conservation of Boson #) are
easily derived from an n-frame theory and include discrete phenomena as well
as continuous.
4. There are not two kinds of fundamental existents (space & particles).
There is only one. The unbounded frame. But there are n of them.
5. It is clearly "background" free. (see Loop Quantum Gravity. Lee
Smolin's "Three Roads to Quantum Gravity" will help.)
6. Its simplicity leads to some very elegant Math.
7. Gravity is simple to derive.
8. Special relativity is simple to explain -- especially the twin paradox.
9. Explaining the accelerating expansion of the universe is trivial.
10. The natural unit of a frame is identical to Compton's wavelength and or
a unit of proper length.
11. No hand waving.
12. No point clocks.
13. No singularities. (there are black holes though -- they just don't have
singularities.)
Discrete space cons:
1. Its a new idea. People resist change.
2. The mathematical topology of n-frame-space is under-developed (a point is
not unique in n-frame space).
3. It is counter to one of the main ideas of Einstein. That of a space-time
continuum. (Einstein reversed his opinion on this one though. See his intro
to Max Jammer's "Concepts of Space". But too many don't get what Einstein
said. -- "There is no space without field.".
4. It is counter intuitive. We see space as a container for particles. We
see them as two fundamentally different existents.
6. It just sounds weird -- Its heresy to some.
7. Its poorly developed compared to QM or String Theory.
8. Cosmologists don't like it. (The big bang goes away. Is that a con or a
pro? )
9. Nobody will talk to you if you discuss it.
10. Its hard to think of more cons.
11. Imagine how arrogant you'll sound trying to tackle such a problem!
Can anyone add other pro's or con's? Or how about pros & cons for
Minkowski's space-time?
Regards,
Jack Martinelli
- Next message: cnctutwiler_at_wmconnect.com: "Re: Fraud in sciences, fraud in mathematics"
- Previous message: Nick: "Re: Photon Duality (Feynman doesn't know why, do you?)"
- Next in thread: Uncle Al: "Re: Discrete Space vs. Minkowsk's Spacetime"
- Reply: Uncle Al: "Re: Discrete Space vs. Minkowsk's Spacetime"
- Reply: Nick: "Re: Discrete Space vs. Minkowsk's Spacetime"
- Reply: zzbunker_at_netscape.net: "Re: Discrete Space vs. Minkowsk's Spacetime"
- Reply: GR_GR: "Re: Discrete Space vs. Minkowsk's Spacetime"
- Reply: Alex: "Re: Discrete Space vs. Minkowsk's Spacetime"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|