Space time is reality Pseudo

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by chinglu, Oct 19, 2013.

  1. chinglu Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,637
    Uh, this is the 6th time.

    d(x,y) = 0 under a metric space iff x = y.

    I am sure you can google.

    Yet, under space-time d(x,0) = 0 and x != 0.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,846



    No as usual you are wrong....Just as you were wrong with your mathematics at the other forum, and which you were banned for being a moron.



    http://mathworld.wolfram.com/MinkowskiSpace.html

    Minkowski space is a four-dimensional space possessing a Minkowski metric

    dtau^2=-(dx^0)^2+(dx^1)^2+(dx^2)^2+(dx^3)^2.
    Alternatively (but less desirably), it can be considered to have a Euclidean metric but with imaginary time coordinate x^0=ict, where c is the speed of light, by convention c=1 is normally used, and i is the imaginary number sqrt(-1). Minkowski space unifies Euclidean three-space plus time (the "fourth dimension") in Einstein's theory of special relativity.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,846
    http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Minkowski space



    Definition

    For d−1∈N, d-dimensional Minkowski space is the Lorentzian manifold whose underlying smooth manifold is the Cartesian space Rd and whose pseudo-Riemannian metric is at each point the Minkowski metric.

    This is naturally a spacetime.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,846
    ENERGY-DEPENDENT MINKOWSKI METRIC
    IN SPACE-TIME


    http://www.mathem.pub.ro/proc/bsgp-10/0MIRON01.PDF


    Highly mathematical this one chinglu, way above my head, and your maths has been shown to be rather faulty at the best of times....anyway, have a look.
    Or are you going to refuse to do that?
     
  8. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,496
    Wow! That proves that nobody, even you, can measure any distance.
    But doesn't it really say that if t = 0, then an object doesn't travel any distance, in which case it doesn't seem to prove much after all.
     
  9. chinglu Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,637
    Uh, use the Minkowski metric and measure the distance between any point of the light sphere and the origin. Let me know what you conclude.
     
  10. chinglu Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,637
    I am not seeing this prove that the Minkowski metric distance between a point on the light sphere and the origin is not zero. That is your task to prove your case.
     
  11. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,846
    You show your ignorance once again.
    You are the one disputing mainstream beliefs and models.
    It is up to you to show the scientific community is in error...
    You cannot do that either here or with the gravity SR/GR thread.
    That's why you are in pseudoscience.
     
  12. chinglu Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,637
    Talk is cheap.

    Prove the Minkowski metric creates a metric space.
     
  13. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,846
    The onus of proof is on you and no matter how much you try and twist to get out of that dilemma, that is always the case.
    Yes, talk is cheap, and you have shown that to the nth degree.
     
  14. Undefined Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,695
    Let's calm down a mo, guys.

    Has anyone yet provided a proof to support the (as interpreted by chinglu) current 'mainstreamer' claim: "Minkowski metric DOES creates a metric space"?

    If not, then chinglu appears to be within his science method/debating rights to FIRST ASK for proof of same from those who HAVE made that 'mainstreamer' claim (as interpreted by chinglu).

    That's my impartial observation of where the onus of proof stands at this juncture, guys (unless someone can point to and explain what/where that proof has already been put here?).

    Good luck and good discussing, guys!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,846

    Disagree entirely Undefined.......
    but anyway......




    http://mathworld.wolfram.com/MinkowskiSpace.html

    Minkowski space is a four-dimensional space possessing a Minkowski metric

    dtau^2=-(dx^0)^2+(dx^1)^2+(dx^2)^2+(dx^3)^2.
    Alternatively (but less desirably), it can be considered to have a Euclidean metric but with imaginary time coordinate x^0=ict, where c is the speed of light, by convention c=1 is normally used, and i is the imaginary number sqrt(-1). Minkowski space unifies Euclidean three-space plus time (the "fourth dimension") in Einstein's theory of special relativity.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Minkowski space



    Definition

    For d−1∈N, d-dimensional Minkowski space is the Lorentzian manifold whose underlying smooth manifold is the Cartesian space Rd and whose pseudo-Riemannian metric is at each point the Minkowski metric.

    This is naturally a spacetime.

    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    ENERGY-DEPENDENT MINKOWSKI METRIC
    IN SPACE-TIME


    http://www.mathem.pub.ro/proc/bsgp-10/0MIRON01.PDF

    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
     
  16. chinglu Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,637
    Prove the Minkowski metric creates a metric space.
     
  17. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,846
  18. chinglu Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,637
  19. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,846
    The onus is on you, to [1] learn to read, [2] learn to interprete it properly, and [3] admit you are wrong as far as SR/GR goes.

    I mean if you were correct, you would not be here would you?? You would be getting your papers peer reviewed, wouldn't you?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  20. chinglu Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,637
    I proved it six times now.
     
  21. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,846
    Great work!!!!
    Now all you need to do is get it peer reviewed!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  22. chinglu Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,637
    prove it wrong yes or no.
     
  23. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,846


    Get it peer reviewed, yes or no.
    I follow accepted mainstream views in this instant.
    The onus is on you to show where the proof I gave you in the three links is wrong.
    You are unable to do that.
    As a consequence, you will continue to wallow in your own dung, as you are doing in at least two other threads.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2013

Share This Page