Richard Hertz wrote:

> On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 5:30:43 PM UTC-3, Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
>> Op 16-jan.-2022 om 20:25 schreef Richard Hertz:
>> > On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 3:40:25 PM UTC-3, Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
>> >> On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 8:42:51 AM UTC-8, Python wrote:
>> [snip ross rant]
>> >> Instead is for putting space-time together with a potential theory,
>> >> helping to illustrate freedom in boost, kinetics will keep us together..
>> >
>> > Bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, ........
>> >
>> > I've followed some of your posts for a while but I never WANTED to meddle with you, Ross.
>> Paradoxically, it takes a big idiot to recognize a small one.
>>
>> Dirk Vdm

> TALKING ABOUT IDIOCIES, HERE ARE SOME DERIVED FROM YOUR GAY PAGAN GOD, CORRUPTER OF WORLDS:

> “Again, just as the electric field, for its part, depends upon the charges and is
> instrumental in producing mechanical interaction between the charges, so we must
> assume here that the metrical field (or, in mathematical language, the tensor with
> components g_ik ) is related to the material filling the world.” (Weyl 1952).

> “...we have, in following the ideas set out just above, to discover the invariant law of
> gravitation, according to which matter determines the components Γα_βl of the
> gravitational field, and which replaces the Newtonian law of attraction in Einstein’s
> Theory.” (Weyl 1952).

> “Thus the equations of the gravitational field also contain the equations for the matter
> (material particles and electromagnetic fields) which produces this field.” (Landau &
> Lifshitz 1951).

> “Clearly, the mass density, or equivalently, energy density ρ(x, t) must play the role as a
> source. However, it is the 00 component of a tensor T_uv(x), the mass-energy-momentum
> distribution of matter. So, this tensor must act as the source of the gravitational field.”
> (Hooft 2009).

> “In general relativity, the stress-energy or energy-momentum tensor T_ab acts as the
> source of the gravitational field. It is related to the Einstein tensor and hence to the
> curvature of space time via the Einstein equation.” (McMahon 2006).

> According to Newton’s laws the ‘natural’ trajectory of a particle which is not being acted
> upon by any external force is a straight line. In general theory of relativity, since gravity
> manifests itself as spacetime curvature, these ‘natural’ straight line trajectories generalize
> to curved paths known as geodesics. These are defined physically as the trajectories
> followed by freely falling particles, i.e., particles which are not being acted upon by any
> non-gravitational external force. Geodesics [1] are defined mathematically as spacetime
> curves that parallel transport their own tangent vectors.

> A question that often arises in gravitational theory is what happens to the geometry
> of space when there is a jump discontinuity in the energy-momentum
> tensor along a surface. For example, what is the connection between the
> curvature properties for the interior Schwarzschild solution and the exterior
> Schwarzschild solution? Here, along the boundary of some surface, the energy
> density experiences a jump discontinuity. Another case is for example
> a shock wave propagating outwards from an exploding star. For such shock
> waves the density can be infinite.
> To investigate these problems, W. Israel [Isr66] developed a mathematical
> framework which is called Israel’s formalism.

> **** MEANINGFUL SHIT, ISN'T IT? HOW COME NOT TO CONVERT TO THIS CULT?

Yes, it's exactly as meaningful as any other theory in physics.

--
Jan

JanPB wrote:

> Richard Hertz wrote:

>> On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 5:30:43 PM UTC-3, Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
>>> Op 16-jan.-2022 om 20:25 schreef Richard Hertz:
>>> > On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 3:40:25 PM UTC-3, Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
>>> >> On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 8:42:51 AM UTC-8, Python wrote:
>>> [snip ross rant]
>>> >> Instead is for putting space-time together with a potential theory,
>>> >> helping to illustrate freedom in boost, kinetics will keep us together..
>>> >
>>> > Bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, ........
>>> >
>>> > I've followed some of your posts for a while but I never WANTED to meddle with you, Ross.
>>> Paradoxically, it takes a big idiot to recognize a small one.
>>>
>>> Dirk Vdm

>> TALKING ABOUT IDIOCIES, HERE ARE SOME DERIVED FROM YOUR GAY PAGAN GOD, CORRUPTER OF WORLDS:

>> “Again, just as the electric field, for its part, depends upon the charges and is
>> instrumental in producing mechanical interaction between the charges, so we must
>> assume here that the metrical field (or, in mathematical language, the tensor with
>> components g_ik ) is related to the material filling the world.” (Weyl 1952).

>> “...we have, in following the ideas set out just above, to discover the invariant law of
>> gravitation, according to which matter determines the components Γα_βl of the
>> gravitational field, and which replaces the Newtonian law of attraction in Einstein’s
>> Theory.” (Weyl 1952).

>> “Thus the equations of the gravitational field also contain the equations for the matter
>> (material particles and electromagnetic fields) which produces this field.” (Landau &
>> Lifshitz 1951).

>> “Clearly, the mass density, or equivalently, energy density ρ(x, t) must play the role as a
>> source. However, it is the 00 component of a tensor T_uv(x), the mass-energy-momentum
>> distribution of matter. So, this tensor must act as the source of the gravitational field.”
>> (Hooft 2009).

>> “In general relativity, the stress-energy or energy-momentum tensor T_ab acts as the
>> source of the gravitational field. It is related to the Einstein tensor and hence to the
>> curvature of space time via the Einstein equation.” (McMahon 2006).

>> According to Newton’s laws the ‘natural’ trajectory of a particle which is not being acted
>> upon by any external force is a straight line. In general theory of relativity, since gravity
>> manifests itself as spacetime curvature, these ‘natural’ straight line trajectories generalize
>> to curved paths known as geodesics. These are defined physically as the trajectories
>> followed by freely falling particles, i.e., particles which are not being acted upon by any
>> non-gravitational external force. Geodesics [1] are defined mathematically as spacetime
>> curves that parallel transport their own tangent vectors.

>> A question that often arises in gravitational theory is what happens to the geometry
>> of space when there is a jump discontinuity in the energy-momentum
>> tensor along a surface. For example, what is the connection between the
>> curvature properties for the interior Schwarzschild solution and the exterior
>> Schwarzschild solution? Here, along the boundary of some surface, the energy
>> density experiences a jump discontinuity. Another case is for example
>> a shock wave propagating outwards from an exploding star. For such shock
>> waves the density can be infinite.
>> To investigate these problems, W. Israel [Isr66] developed a mathematical
>> framework which is called Israel’s formalism.

>> **** MEANINGFUL SHIT, ISN'T IT? HOW COME NOT TO CONVERT TO THIS CULT?

> Yes, it's exactly as meaningful as any other theory in physics.

No. It's even less meaningful than the rest of
physics. You're worshipping some inconsistent
mumble of an insane crazie. You've got a proof
of the inconsistency, and your mad ravings are
not changing anything, poor trash.

On 02/15/2024 03:22 AM, JanPB wrote:
> Richard Hertz wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 5:30:43 PM UTC-3, Dirk Van de moortel
>> wrote:
>>> Op 16-jan.-2022 om 20:25 schreef Richard Hertz:
>>> > On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 3:40:25 PM UTC-3, Ross A. Finlayson
>>> wrote: >> On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 8:42:51 AM UTC-8, Python
>>> wrote:
>>> [snip ross rant]
>>> >> Instead is for putting space-time together with a potential
>>> theory, >> helping to illustrate freedom in boost, kinetics will keep
>>> us together.. > > Bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, ........ > > I've followed
>>> some of your posts for a while but I never WANTED to meddle with you,
>>> Ross.
>>> Paradoxically, it takes a big idiot to recognize a small one.
>>> Dirk Vdm
>
>> TALKING ABOUT IDIOCIES, HERE ARE SOME DERIVED FROM YOUR GAY PAGAN GOD,
>> CORRUPTER OF WORLDS:
>
>> “Again, just as the electric field, for its part, depends upon the
>> charges and is
>> instrumental in producing mechanical interaction between the charges,
>> so we must
>> assume here that the metrical field (or, in mathematical language, the
>> tensor with
>> components g_ik ) is related to the material filling the world.” (Weyl
>> 1952).
>
>> “...we have, in following the ideas set out just above, to discover
>> the invariant law of
>> gravitation, according to which matter determines the components Γα_βl
>> of the
>> gravitational field, and which replaces the Newtonian law of
>> attraction in Einstein’s
>> Theory.” (Weyl 1952).
>
>> “Thus the equations of the gravitational field also contain the
>> equations for the matter
>> (material particles and electromagnetic fields) which produces this
>> field.” (Landau &
>> Lifshitz 1951).
>
>> “Clearly, the mass density, or equivalently, energy density ρ(x, t)
>> must play the role as a
>> source. However, it is the 00 component of a tensor T_uv(x), the
>> mass-energy-momentum
>> distribution of matter. So, this tensor must act as the source of the
>> gravitational field.”
>> (Hooft 2009).
>
>> “In general relativity, the stress-energy or energy-momentum tensor
>> T_ab acts as the
>> source of the gravitational field. It is related to the Einstein
>> tensor and hence to the
>> curvature of space time via the Einstein equation.” (McMahon 2006).
>
>> According to Newton’s laws the ‘natural’ trajectory of a particle
>> which is not being acted
>> upon by any external force is a straight line. In general theory of
>> relativity, since gravity
>> manifests itself as spacetime curvature, these ‘natural’ straight line
>> trajectories generalize
>> to curved paths known as geodesics. These are defined physically as
>> the trajectories
>> followed by freely falling particles, i.e., particles which are not
>> being acted upon by any
>> non-gravitational external force. Geodesics [1] are defined
>> mathematically as spacetime
>> curves that parallel transport their own tangent vectors.
>
>> A question that often arises in gravitational theory is what happens
>> to the geometry
>> of space when there is a jump discontinuity in the energy-momentum
>> tensor along a surface. For example, what is the connection between the
>> curvature properties for the interior Schwarzschild solution and the
>> exterior
>> Schwarzschild solution? Here, along the boundary of some surface, the
>> energy
>> density experiences a jump discontinuity. Another case is for example
>> a shock wave propagating outwards from an exploding star. For such shock
>> waves the density can be infinite.
>> To investigate these problems, W. Israel [Isr66] developed a mathematical
>> framework which is called Israel’s formalism.
>
>> **** MEANINGFUL SHIT, ISN'T IT? HOW COME NOT TO CONVERT TO THIS CULT?
>
> Yes, it's exactly as meaningful as any other theory in physics.
>
> --
> Jan

That's what "Einstein's bridge" is kind of about.

Have you looked at Antoni Sym's "Soliton Manifolds ...", it's very good.

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/3-540-16039-6_6

This 2005 paper has a mostly same edition from 1985,
from a Sheveningen conference, which isn't far from Copenhagen.

The idea of space-contraction, holistically,
instead of length-contraction and time-dilation separately,
sort of has a neat and natural form for intuition,
if you consider that in the atomic model,
that the volumes of the atoms are mostly space.

For a theory of gravity, of course there's an idea
for "fall gravity", which unites with the strong nuclear force,
in asymptotic freedom, providing a quite teleologically motivated
theoretical physicist's, inclination that its placement in
the theory results "least action", or what you might say
for Maupertuis and Euler and so on, or even the old
"what goes up: must come down".

About the theory of mathematics, of course mathematics
_owes_ physics the continuum dynamics what are the needful,
or as what is "nonstandard analysis", these days.

So anyways, Einstein already made room
for "space contraction", and "Einstein's bridge",
and it has that GR is first and SR is local.
It's called his theory of Relativity.

"Hey Einstein, is gravity down?" "Yeah, straight down."

A meaningful theory "of" physics, of course, is well-understood
these days to be a gauge theory about a continuous manifold,
its continuum mechanics in dynamics, with continuity laws
above symmetry laws, a field theory, a total field theory,
and a differential-system, including inertial-systems.

(... With a tetrad of quantities including mass, charge,
light's speed, and the proton's life-time, in a theory
with general super-symmetry, as of a super-string theory
about that it's a continuum mechanics.)

.... In resonance theory and a theory of sum potentials, real.

Nose-picking without extracting brain-matter
is a meaningful theory "in" physics, and
coat-tailing wall-papering fudge-coating
is a most usual practice. Navel-gazing, ....

The cos-mu-logical constant is non-zero but vanishing, ....

I wrote quite a handful of sigma algebras for line-reals.