The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: 4 a deeper discussion: Is distance an absolute invariant?  (Read 10306 times)

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: 4 a deeper discussion: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #225 on: 07/03/2016 14:15:32 »
My guess is you are not describing blades so this is not differential geometry.

What do you mean by ''blades'' Jeff?


I am not trying to describe Geometry as such, I am trying to describe the singularity whole of K=0 between all mass and that space-time is only between masses.  time only exists of mass, space is not expanding an object can relativity contract to k=0.
And to see anything there has to be a ''width'' of light.  Width of light shows 3 dimensional objects , no width it remains a singularity. I.e the dust particle I explained in other thread is a singularity.


Consider wave-width instead of wave-length.


Imagine a piece of elastic that was unbreakable, imagine you stretched and stretched and stretched the elastic until the density was stretched so thin you could not even see the elastic any more turning the elastic into a dimensionless singularity.

Now imagine this elastic is made of two components, emr which always wants to expand and dark energy that always wants to contract.









« Last Edit: 07/03/2016 14:27:55 by Thebox »
 

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1309
  • Thanked: 9 times
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: 4 a deeper discussion: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #226 on: 07/03/2016 14:53:43 »
Look box, I really can't help you with your maths.  My reason for posting on this forum is the same as yours.  That I may understand if my ideas are mathematically viable. (chuckle) ... and... I really wouldn't take any notice at-all of my interpretations of any mathematical procedure... I'm actually anticipating, if not fully expecting that I 'will' be pulled up on my description of the inverse square law as thus.  When I do, watch instead of talk, we both might learn something!
 

Online jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3931
  • Thanked: 55 times
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: 4 a deeper discussion: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #227 on: 07/03/2016 18:26:19 »
You
My guess is you are not describing blades so this is not differential geometry.

What do you mean by ''blades'' Jeff?


I am not trying to describe Geometry as such, I am trying to describe the singularity whole of K=0 between all mass and that space-time is only between masses.  time only exists of mass, space is not expanding an object can relativity contract to k=0.
And to see anything there has to be a ''width'' of light.  Width of light shows 3 dimensional objects , no width it remains a singularity. I.e the dust particle I explained in other thread is a singularity.


Consider wave-width instead of wave-length.


Imagine a piece of elastic that was unbreakable, imagine you stretched and stretched and stretched the elastic until the density was stretched so thin you could not even see the elastic any more turning the elastic into a dimensionless singularity.

Now imagine this elastic is made of two components, emr which always wants to expand and dark energy that always wants to contract.

It wouldn't make much sense unless you had studied linear algebra and Grassman algebra
 

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1309
  • Thanked: 9 times
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: 4 a deeper discussion: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #228 on: 07/03/2016 20:03:57 »
Don't worry box.  I think I'm starting to understand Jeff a bit more these days.  He is actually, I realise, remarkably adept at being both droll and dry at the same time, and it only appears as though he is being surly :).   This being much like a slowing of time in relation to a missing bit of length only appearing as though it is a length contraction.

As said, I'm a dolt with the maths, but I'm pretty certain he may just have dropped you some rather helpful hints in the direction your mathematical study should focus on... perhaps?
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: 4 a deeper discussion: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #229 on: 07/03/2016 20:29:59 »
Grassman algebra

Lol I just looked up Grassman algebra, could you imagine the look on my face, like I had just found some alien coding or something lol. I'm not so sure that's what I need, I only want to explain the relative singularity of light propagating through space in relationship to relativistic contraction of observers, but I did recognise n=0 and 1 and K mentioned, so I think it may have something to do with it.

Maybe I am trying to explain something they already know and the joke is really on me but to my knowledge my idea is unique.

 

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1309
  • Thanked: 9 times
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: 4 a deeper discussion: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #230 on: 09/03/2016 09:48:38 »
Lol I just looked up Grassman algebra, could you imagine the look on my face, like I had just found some alien coding or something lol.

Nice one Box!  Lol!  I know the feeling well!
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: 4 a deeper discussion: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #230 on: 09/03/2016 09:48:38 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums