Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Physics Forum Spaces: Logic and illogic in SRT / GRT.

Spaces: Logic and illogic in SRT / GRT.

In SRT 4D is: ds^2 = dt^2 - dx^2 - dy^2 - d^z^2.
What is 4D in the Nature ?
When 4D curved we have new D.
What is new D in the Nature ?

One comment:
Your English is not clear to me.
In both special relativity theory, and general relativity,
there are four dimensions. We use the symbols x, y, z, and t.
When these four dimensions are curved, we still have four
dimensions, we do NOT have a new dimension
/ Morningf /
==============.

I try to understand situation. Am I mistaken?
1.
In SRT 4D is: ds^2 = dt^2 - dx^2 - dy^2 - d^z^2.
What is 4D in the Nature ? Nobody knows.
2.
But if we put mass in 4D - then 4D will curved.

Question: Will all continuum 4D be curved or
only small, local part of it ?
3.
What experiment says?
The experiment says: near a big concentration of mass
( like our Sun ) the space is curved.

But in the beginning we decided to put the mass in 4D.
And a bit later we forgot this decision and
started to say, we don’t know that the 4D in the Nature.
So, in my opinion our Sun must be in 4D .
4.
But what is 4D in the Universe ?
4D is Space between billion and billion stars and galactic.
The whole mass of these billion and billion stars and
galactic are very few. They cannot produce effect of Gravity
in the whole Universe. They can produce effect of Gravity
only in the small, local part of the whole Universe.
4D is the Vacuum (spacetime).
Vacuum is some kind of Energy space in the condition T=0K.

And when 4D (spacetime) curved we will have a new small,
local D (space and time).
New D in the Universe is some star ( like our Sun ),
or some planet (like our Earth ).
========== . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. Socratus.
================.

Comment 2.

When 4D curved we have new D.

Not necessarily. Take a piece of paper and put a
rectangular grid. That is the 2D euclidean space.
Now take another piece of paper and make something
like a rectangluar grid, but use wavey lines, and make the
boxes between the lines bigger on some parts of the paper
than on others. This is a case where there is a nonzero curvature
in 2D, because the grid is now the natural coordinate system.

> What is new D in the Nature ?

There doesn't have to be any "new D". The curvature
refers to the notion that the natural coordinate frame in
(t,x,y,z) has distances shorter and the clock speeding up
or slowing down, but where it is not possible for an observer
to see the effect locally.
/ by John Stockwell /
====================.

The book: Albert Einstein and the Cosmic World Order

/ Six lectures delivered at the University
of Michigan in the Spring of 1962 /
by Cornelius Lanczos

Lanczos served as assistant to Einstein during the period 1928–29.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornelius_Lanczos

My brief comment on ‘ The lecture № 3.’
=============.
Cornelius Lanczos wrote:
SRT was created on two postulates.
First postulate – there isn’t absolute speed of movement.
Every movement is relative.
Second postulate – the speed of light ( quantum of light)
is constant.
Lanczos wrote: from the first point of view it seems that
to unite these two different postulates is impossible,
trying to do this is absolute nonsense. (!)
But . . . . It was be done. (!)
. . It was needed the great Einstein’s courage to do this unite. (!)
How did Einstein connected them ? (!)
1
He solved this problem saying that Newton’s absolute space
and time are relative.
2
And these two postulates can be unite in spacetime- 4D.
3
As the result we can see different occurrences :
( for example: not only the physical parameters of particles
can change but space and time too )

And Lanczos wrote: now we are accustomed to this conception
and never, not for the world give up from such manner of thinking.
==================.
Very well.
There is only small problem in this conception:
What is 4D?
Nobody knows.

S.

Comment by Androcles:

If SR is based on two postulates, why does every jerk and
his dog mumble about clocks, inertial frames and observers?
/ Androcles /
http://groups.google.ca/group/sci.physics.relativity/browse_thread/thread/56bd97a99c325d4b#
==================================

Spaces: Logic and illogic in SRT / GRT. (2)

Minkowski (1908):
" the views of space and time that I wish to lay before you
have sprung from the soil of experimental physics and therein
lies their strength. They are radical.
Henceforth space by itself, and time by itself are doomed
to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of union
of the two will preserve an independent reality."
========.
My comment.

The space by itself, and time by itself are the conditions
which we can see on our and another planets.

What is "a kind of union of the two will preserve an
independent reality." (-4D) ?
It is flat negative space without Gravity (-4D ).
- 4D is Space between billion and billion stars and galactic.
The whole mass of these billion and billion stars and
galactic are very few. They cannot produce effect of Gravity
in the whole Universe. These masses can produce effect
of Gravity only in the small, local part of the whole Universe.
- 4D is the Vacuum (spacetime).
Vacuum is some kind of Energy space in the condition T=0K.
#
The book: Albert Einstein and the Cosmic World Order
/ Six lectures delivered at the University
of Michigan in the Spring of 1962 /
by Cornelius Lanczos
==========.
In the lecture № 6. Lanczos wrote; when Minkowski
gave his interpretation SRT was become clear, that realization
the theory in the physical conceptions was impossible.
The SRT is rather geometrical than physical phenomenon;
and it must be explain on geometrical language, and not
on language of physics.
So wrote Cornelius Lanczos, who served as assistant to Einstein
during the period 1928–29.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornelius_Lanczos

And from 1908, from one generation to other pass this thought;
If you want to understand physics you must know mathematics.
And if you cannot understand the beauty of SRT mathematics
you cannot be physicist. And it isn’t necessary to explain SRT
in physical conceptions. If the practical result confirms good
with math conclusion - it is enough.
Do you say the theory look strange, paradoxical?
Not for us - mathematicians. ( !)
#
And more than 100 years this idea manages scientist’s brain.
It is prohibit, it is taboo to image SRT ( -4D) as a real process,
which can be explain by ordinary language.
Maybe we need other 100 years to pass this taboo.
==========.
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. Socratus.
================.