Science > Physics > Derivative Products of Form (df/dx)(dg/dx) in Physics 20: Time As Diagonal Vector
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"OsherD" |
| Date: |
31 Jan 2006 12:52:36 AM |
| Object: |
Derivative Products of Form (df/dx)(dg/dx) in Physics 20: Time As Diagonal Vector |
From Osher Doctorow
From section 16 of this thread, we have:
1) grad(f) * (1, 1, 1) = (x-->y)
where f is defined as:
2) f(x, y, z) = -(1/2)x^2 + (1/2)y^2 + z
Since (x-->y) involves time (even dimensionally, although arguably as a
probability magnitude times a time dimensional constant of magnitude
1), it follows that (1, 1, 1) or grad f involves time. But how? The
most likely scenario is that (1, 1, 1) is a projection of (1, 1, 1, 1)
in x-y-z-t coordinates. This is in a sense a "distinguished" vector,
being the "main diagonal" in spacetime.
There are two main ways arguably to "construct" varying time from (1,
1, 1, 1). We can multiply it by a nonnegative scalar that grows in
size at some "constant" rate corresponding to the usual idea of
constant motion along the positive time axis. Or we can retain its
magnitude and rotate it with constant "angular velocity".
Osher Doctorow
.
|
|
| User: "OsherD" |
|
| Title: Re: Derivative Products of Form (df/dx)(dg/dx) in Physics 20: Time As Diagonal Vector |
31 Jan 2006 01:00:57 AM |
|
|
From Osher Doctorow
By claiming that the speed of light is in effect an "absolute" with
finite value, physicists are in no position to argue that the diagonal
vector (1, 1, 1, 1) or even (1, 1, 1) in R^3 is not "absolute". This
is reminiscent of the diagonal of a square matrix which turns out,
whether for block matrices or ordinary matrices, to have fundamental
properties. Although "absolute" is in some ways outmoded in coordinate
terminology, "fundamental" is good enough.
Osher Doctorow
.
|
|
|
| User: "DrDon Ablian." |
|
| Title: Re: Derivative Products of Form (df/dx)(dg/dx) in Physics 20: Time As Diagonal Vector |
31 Jan 2006 09:46:19 AM |
|
|
"OsherD" <> wrote in message
news:1138690857.698749.256720@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
From Osher Doctorow
By claiming that the speed of light is in effect an "absolute" with
finite value, physicists are in no position to argue that the diagonal
vector (1, 1, 1, 1) or even (1, 1, 1) in R^3 is not "absolute".
the speed of light has nothing to do with your equations.
You have a slight geometric model, and thats it.
This
is reminiscent of the diagonal of a square matrix which turns out,
whether for block matrices or ordinary matrices, to have fundamental
properties.
Why introduce matrix math? Or do you mean you have discovered "The Matrix"?
Although "absolute" is in some ways outmoded in coordinate
terminology, "fundamental" is good enough.
Osher Doctorow
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "OsherD" |
|
| Title: Re: Derivative Products of Form (df/dx)(dg/dx) in Physics 20: Time As Diagonal Vector |
31 Jan 2006 02:06:31 AM |
|
|
From Osher Doctorow
I should also point out that some people have claimed in a recent
thread that group velocity vs particle/signal velocity differences rule
out superluminal travel except "trivially", etc.
I remind readers that one heck of a lot of physical theories involve at
least presently unobserved quantities or objects or processes, and that
superluminal objects' not being "observed" doesn't rule them out.
These include:
A. Randall-Sundrum theory with the bulk vs brane(s)
B. Gott-Li time loop cosmology
C. Seiberg-Steinhardt-Turok neocyclic cosmology
D. Proto-Universe tachyon condensation theories
E. Steven Weinberg's effective gauge quantum field theory
F. Black hole theories
G. Cosmic string, textures, domain walls, etc. theories
H. Higgs theories
I. Superstring/Quantum Gravity/Brane theories
J. Kaluza-Klein theory
Superluminal theories are even more plausible arguably than the other
theories above since they are by definition undetectable by light or
sublight detectors. There is, however, a quite simple "algorithm" for
deciding one way or the other: get out in space and try accelerating.
We may well need improved technologies, but heck, that's what we should
have been trying decades ago.
Osher Doctorow
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
