Science > Physics > Equivalence Principle without Geometry but Holographic Principle
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"quantis" |
| Date: |
11 Mar 2006 05:47:30 AM |
| Object: |
Equivalence Principle without Geometry but Holographic Principle |
Is it possible to model GR without using Riemann's metric but
the Equivalence Principle using the concept of Holographic Principle
or other models? Pls. mention theories along this line you have heard
or read about.
quantis
.
|
|
| User: "Ken S. Tucker" |
|
| Title: Re: Equivalence Principle without Geometry but Holographic Principle |
14 Mar 2006 02:11:43 AM |
|
|
Dr. Carlip has done an excellent overview.
quantis wrote:
Is it possible to model GR without using Riemann's metric but
the Equivalence Principle using the concept of Holographic Principle
or other models? Pls. mention theories along this line you have heard
or read about.
quantis
Physically you need Equations of Motion (EoM) to
predict geometric paths of masses including those
having charge.
Not being funny, please note geo*metric*.
Whatever means one theorizes GR an interface to
4D for the EoM's is physically necessary to provide
a meaningful prediction and result.
Recently it appears mathematical physicists are using
algebra in place of geometry, in My Humble Opinion
that algebra is equalivalent to frustrated numeralogy,
over the fusion of the Standard Model with GR in a
classical top-down approach, in place of using a more
principled approach. Like everywhere the Principles
are fairly well known, what is lacking is the procedure
of application.
Regards
Ken S. Tucker
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sue..." |
|
| Title: Re: Equivalence Principle without Geometry but Holographic Principle |
14 Mar 2006 05:22:27 AM |
|
|
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
Dr. Carlip has done an excellent overview.
quantis wrote:
Is it possible to model GR without using Riemann's metric but
the Equivalence Principle using the concept of Holographic Principle
or other models? Pls. mention theories along this line you have heard
or read about.
quantis
Physically you need Equations of Motion (EoM) to
predict geometric paths of masses including those
having charge.
That is a profound observaton. If your most fundamental
entity exerts a force then you 'run out rope' with a geometry
before you have described it. OTOH, if your most fundamental
entity can only be described in terms of its motion, the
lack of an adaquate geometry can halt your investigation.
Are objects heavy because they move or do they move
because they are heavy? A particle with a wavelength
leaves us wondering which tool we can do without.
Does a charge-pair exhibiit motion, or does it simply
reflect the atomic motion in our tools ?
[PDF] Direct Observation of Vortices in Superconductors
A dissipation-free current can be obtained in a superconductor only
when the tiny ... observable by Lorentz microscopy using a 300-kV
field-emission
http://www.jsapi.jsap.or.jp/Pdf/Number02/Frontier1.pdf 2.31MB
~Ya know, it would be enough to really understand the electron~
http://www.almaden.ibm.com/vis/stm/gallery.html
Sue...
Not being funny, please note geo*metric*.
Whatever means one theorizes GR an interface to
4D for the EoM's is physically necessary to provide
a meaningful prediction and result.
Recently it appears mathematical physicists are using
algebra in place of geometry, in My Humble Opinion
that algebra is equalivalent to frustrated numeralogy,
over the fusion of the Standard Model with GR in a
classical top-down approach, in place of using a more
principled approach. Like everywhere the Principles
are fairly well known, what is lacking is the procedure
of application.
Regards
Ken S. Tucker
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket" |
|
| Title: Re: Equivalence Principle without Geometry but Holographic Principle |
16 Mar 2006 12:17:38 PM |
|
|
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
Dr. Carlip has done an excellent overview.
[...]
Recently it appears mathematical physicists are using
algebra in place of geometry, in My Humble Opinion
that algebra is equalivalent to frustrated numeralogy,
over the fusion of the Standard Model with GR in a
classical top-down approach, in place of using a more
principled approach. Like everywhere the Principles
are fairly well known, what is lacking is the procedure
of application.
Regards
Ken S. Tucker
If it's linear algebra, it could be geometry.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Equivalence Principle without Geometry but Holographic Principle |
13 Mar 2006 03:16:06 PM |
|
|
In sci.physics quantis <quantum_stuff@yahoo.com> wrote:
Is it possible to model GR without using Riemann's metric but
the Equivalence Principle using the concept of Holographic
Principle or other models?
I'm not sure what you mean.
First, any theory that obeys the equivalence principle can be
written as a metric theory -- see, for example, section 2.3 of
Will's book _Theory and experiment in gravitational physics_.
This is essentially because any such theory picks out a set of
preferred spacetime trajectories, those of freely falling bodies,
and these define a geometry.
Second, though, it's not logically necessary to interpret any
metric theory -- including standard GR -- as a theory of curved
spacetime. Locally, at least, you can always find a "flat space"
interpretation in which the gravitational field acts to distort
rods and clocks in a way that makes the spacetime appear curved.
None of this has anything in particular to do with the holographic
principle, or with any particular model.
Steve Carlip
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sue..." |
|
| Title: Re: Equivalence Principle without Geometry but Holographic Principle |
13 Mar 2006 05:40:51 PM |
|
|
wrote:
In sci.physics quantis <quantum_stuff@yahoo.com> wrote:
Is it possible to model GR without using Riemann's metric but
the Equivalence Principle using the concept of Holographic
Principle or other models?
I'm not sure what you mean.
First, any theory that obeys the equivalence principle can be
written as a metric theory -- see, for example, section 2.3 of
Will's book _Theory and experiment in gravitational physics_.
This is essentially because any such theory picks out a set of
preferred spacetime trajectories, those of freely falling bodies,
and these define a geometry.
Second, though, it's not logically necessary to interpret any
metric theory -- including standard GR -- as a theory of curved
spacetime. Locally, at least, you can always find a "flat space"
interpretation in which the gravitational field acts to distort
rods and clocks in a way that makes the spacetime appear curved.
None of this has anything in particular to do with the holographic
principle, or with any particular model.
[PPT] What is an optical tweezer?File Format: Microsoft Powerpoint 97 -
View as HTML
you can divide the resulting force into two forces ... the hologram is
the inverse Fourier transform of the image; the image is the Fourier
transform of the ...
http://www.unipv.it/iuss/sus/lesson5_opticaltweezers.ppt
<< The position of the periodic box that contains an
identical image of particles as the active box is r_n.
The particle positions in the active box
are r_i and r_j .
Using Fourier transforms,
( big super charger equation for Ewald sums )...
http://www.research.ibm.com/grape/grape_ewald.htm
Sue...
Steve Carlip
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket" |
|
| Title: Re: Equivalence Principle without Geometry but Holographic Principle |
16 Mar 2006 12:13:22 PM |
|
|
wrote:
In sci.physics quantis <quantum_stuff@yahoo.com> wrote:
Is it possible to model GR without using Riemann's metric but
the Equivalence Principle using the concept of Holographic
Principle or other models?
I'm not sure what you mean.
Aw, come on, you're the dispenser of wisdom on this group!
First, any theory that obeys the equivalence principle can be
written as a metric theory -- see, for example, section 2.3 of
Will's book _Theory and experiment in gravitational physics_.
This is essentially because any such theory picks out a set of
preferred spacetime trajectories, those of freely falling bodies,
and these define a geometry.
Second, though, it's not logically necessary to interpret any
metric theory -- including standard GR -- as a theory of curved
spacetime. Locally, at least, you can always find a "flat space"
interpretation in which the gravitational field acts to distort
rods and clocks in a way that makes the spacetime appear curved.
None of this has anything in particular to do with the holographic
principle, or with any particular model.
The holographic universe is about projecting from a higher number of
dimensions to one of lower dimensions, specifically OURS, may we?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket" |
|
| Title: Re: Equivalence Principle without Geometry but Holographic Principle |
11 Mar 2006 06:08:37 AM |
|
|
quantis wrote:
Is it possible to model GR without using Riemann's metric but
the Equivalence Principle using the concept of Holographic Principle
or other models?
Why would you want to?
.
|
|
|
| User: "quantis" |
|
| Title: Re: Equivalence Principle without Geometry but Holographic Principle |
11 Mar 2006 06:45:13 AM |
|
|
Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket wrote:
quantis wrote:
Is it possible to model GR without using Riemann's metric but
the Equivalence Principle using the concept of Holographic Principle
or other models?
Why would you want to?
Just want to look at it from different angles.
Quantis
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sue..." |
|
| Title: Re: Equivalence Principle without Geometry but Holographic Principle |
11 Mar 2006 07:58:20 AM |
|
|
quantis wrote:
Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket wrote:
quantis wrote:
Is it possible to model GR without using Riemann's metric but
the Equivalence Principle using the concept of Holographic Principle
or other models?
Why would you want to?
<< Just want to look at it from different angles.>>
Mahmoud is really an informant for the inqusitiors.
That is why he asked.
"Abandon all hope" for even thinking that anything
but "curvature of spacetime" could explain gravity.
May the cinders of your soul ward off
those that would follow in your sinful footsteps
and may your spaghettified remains ensnarl the
all the evil doers of a like mind. ;-)
Sue...
Quantis
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket" |
|
| Title: Re: Equivalence Principle without Geometry but Holographic Principle |
16 Mar 2006 12:09:19 PM |
|
|
Sue... wrote:
quantis wrote:
Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket wrote:
quantis wrote:
Is it possible to model GR without using Riemann's metric but
the Equivalence Principle using the concept of Holographic Principle
or other models?
Why would you want to?
<< Just want to look at it from different angles.>>
Mahmoud is really an informant for the inqusitiors.
That is why he asked.
Glad I found out. :-O
"Abandon all hope" for even thinking that anything
but "curvature of spacetime" could explain gravity.
God invented HE-E-E-EEE-E-E-E-L for people who ask such questions.
(St. Orgastine)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket" |
|
| Title: Re: Equivalence Principle without Geometry but Holographic Principle |
16 Mar 2006 12:05:39 PM |
|
|
quantis wrote:
Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket wrote:
quantis wrote:
Is it possible to model GR without using Riemann's metric but
the Equivalence Principle using the concept of Holographic Principle
or other models?
Why would you want to?
Just want to look at it from different angles.
That depends on the plane of projection. :-)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sue..." |
|
| Title: Re: Equivalence Principle without Geometry but Holographic Principle |
11 Mar 2006 05:57:10 AM |
|
|
quantis wrote:
Is it possible to model GR without using Riemann's metric but
the Equivalence Principle using the concept of Holographic Principle
or other models? Pls. mention theories along this line you have heard
or read about.
quantis
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=fourier+ewald+gravity&btnG=Google+Search
Sue...
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
