0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Well, the main point with them should be if they also transport a energy, and how much? Otherwise it's just SpaceTime geometry as I get it and nothing locally noticeable for me, meaning that it won't break me into non functioning parts getting 'hit' by a gravitational wave. But the question about that 'energy' is a weird one to me.
np, I know JP. It's hard to evaluate what they write, it is a lot of equations assumed, and definitions. That's also why I don't want to define 'energy, other than as a 'exchange' or 'transformation' cost. But I'm always open for another shot on what it is, or isn't maybe?
That depends on how I define it, doesn't it. If a transformation is without a cost then we have conservation of energy, right? If it is so then 'to do work' becomes a meaningless definition. You don't 'do work', you just 'transform energy' from one 'form' to another, no cost attached. Energy is a very weird idea to me.Alternatively you lose something in a transformation, some 'energy' disappearing.=Actually the idea of conservation of energy also, to me, seem to crave a container model, how else can I understand it to be kept? Where?
Well, I'm not finding one way better than another. The conservation laws goes back to Noether and the definitions she made. ...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please
REGISTER or LOGINIt's just that defining it locally a lot of things becomes questionable to me. But it is also so that where you have two stories each giving you a working logic, then the question becomes if they need to be joined, or if there is a possibility of 'simultaneous' logics existing? I think that possibility exist.