Re: Covariant Ether Theories & Special Relativity

[brian a m stuckless]

sal wrote: >
> On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 13:53:39 -0800, Parti Lad wrote: > > >
> > sal wrote:
> >> On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 05:08:01 -0800, Parti Lad wrote: > >>
> >> > Bill Hobba wrote:
> >> >> "Parti Lad" <part...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:1141297160.9...@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
> >> >> > http://www-cfadc.phy.ornl.gov/psif/fin_word1.pdf#search='Kholmetskii%20Covariant%20Ether%20Theories%20and%20Special%20Relativity'
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The above covariant ether theories angle seems to be accepted
> >> >> > by physicists. I'm generally confused of the many definitions
> >> >> > and versions of aether. How does the above differ to Lorentz
> >> >> > Aether Theory? I can't understand the full mathematics so I
> >> >> > can't analyze all on my own.
> >> >>
> >> >> Without wishing to discourage you in your quest it is generally
> >> >> accepted that physics, while not mathematics, is written in the
> >> >> language of mathematics. It would be wise to become familiar
> >> >> with the language. I recommend - Penrose - The Road To Reality.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks
> >> >> Bill
> >> >
> >> > I only know basic calculus and pre-calculus. What's why I need
> >> > conceptual grasp to understand the basics. Anyway. Do you think I
> >> > should go on with partial differential equation or differential
> >> > geometry or should it be ordinary differental equations (what's
> >> > next after calculus for physics purposes).
> >>
> >> None of the above.
> >>
> >> You need algebra, of the sort often referred to as "college
> >> algebra". If, for example, you haven't encountered 2-forms in
> >> algebra class, then algebra is certainly what you should look at
> >> next. It normally follows calculus in the math sequence (or at any
> >> rate it used to back when I was in school).
> >>
> >> Special relativity, at the simple level, _is_ linear algebra, with
> >> a few decorations around the edges to remind you that it's supposed
> >> to be physics, not math.
> >
> > algebra only?
>
> Algebra _first_. (SR at the "simple level", I said.)
>
> There are two kinds of "algebra". There's the stuff you studied in
> high school, where you look at functions of a single variable, and
> polynomials, and you learn the quadratic formula, and stuff like that.
> That's _not_ what I'm talking about.
>
> Then there's what I would call "college algebra" for want of a better
> name -- it is most often just called "algebra" -- and it's almost
> entirely unrelated to "high school algebra."
>
> _PART_ of it is what you may think of as "linear algebra".
>
> Do you know what a group is? A ring? A division ring? A field?
>
> Do you know what a module over a ring is?
>
> Do you know what a Lie group is?
>
> An ideal?
>
> Do you know what bilinear forms are? Do you know what the Spectral
> theorem is, and do you know what a skew-symmetric, symmetric, and
> positive definite form are? Do you know what Hermitian forms are, and
> what the unitary group is?
>
> That's all part of algebra. What's more, every one of the items I
> named in the last paragraph is vital to an understanding of
> special relativity, general relativity, quantum mechanics, and quantum
> field theory.
>
> Do you think you can just jump right into higher math without
> mastering basic arithmetic first?
>
> Algebra is basic arithmetic. Once you master it higher math becomes
> possible. Until you master it anything more advanced is going to be
> far, far harder if not completely impossible.
>
> > SR is boring.
>
> Too bad you feel that way. Too trivial, is that it?
>
> Walk first, run later. GR is based firmly on SR.
>
> SR takes place in four dimensions and uses tensor calculus, just like
> its big brother, GR. If you want to be taken farther than you can
> go, and get some idea of just how little you really know about SR,
> pick up a copy of Rindler's "Introduction to Special Relativity".
> It's a slender volume -- hardly more than a monograph, really. And
> it's just special relativity -- nothing too advanced, eh?
>
> > Of course I want to master General Relativty and Quantum Field
> > Theory. They are the stuff dreams are made of. I'm interest in them
> > because I know they are just a subset of something.
>
> Right. First, learn algebra.
>
> If you don't like the idea of getting a used copy of Warner
> second-hand for 10 bucks, then shell out $100 and get a copy of
> Michael Artin's "Algebra". It covers the same material, but it's
> clear, readable, entertaining, and it won't put you to sleep.
>
> > About algebra... are you talking about linear algebra? What kind of
> > algebra
> > is there.
>
> See above.
>
> > How about tensor calculus.
>
> For tensor calculus _first_ you need a very firm grounding in ... you
> guessed it ... algebra, because tensors are what we might call algebraic
> entities. In tensor calculus, you could say you start with smooth but
> floppy higher-dimensional object on which you would like to be able to use
> calculus. Then in order to provide enough structure to make calculus work
> you glue large amounts of math you learned back in algebra class onto it.
>
> > Can you list the order of
> > mathematics (in order of progress) such as:
> >
> > Basic Algebra
> > Basic Geometry
>
> I don't know what you mean by 'basic' algebra or geometry. Do you mean
> stuff like (x-y)^2 = x^2 - y^2, and a^2 + b^2 = c^2?
>
> That's necessary, of course, but you really should have gotten through it
> in pre-calculus.
>
> > Basic Trigo
> > Basic Calculus
>
> You've just listed a high school curriculum. That's not what we're
> talking about; we're talking about what starts _after_ that.
>
> In some schools, after high school algebra, geometry, and trig, you have
> calculus I, II, and III, where I and II are single and multivariable
> calculus and III is basic linear algebra.
>
> Calc II should include div, grad, curl, Green's theorem, Stokes'
> theorem, the divergence theorem, and multiple integration, of course,
> as well as functions of multiple variables and such.
>
> Along with linear algebra, that's the bare minimum for SR. For anything
> more you need a rather heavy-duty grasp of yet more algebra, followed by
> tensor calculus for GR (which builds on the algebra, believe me) and some
> differential equations for QM and related areas.
>
> Differential geometry is the marriage of algebra and calculus and
> forms most of the basis for tensor calculus.
>
> >
> > what's next as done in math school
>
> What's "math school"?
>
> >
> > LInear Algebra?
> > Tensor Calculus?
> > Partial differential calculus?
> > Ordinary differential calculus?
>
> Do you have a clue what you mean by any of this?
>
> > As I have said. SR is just part of it. QFT is the meat of the trade.
> >
> >
> >> Modern Algebra by Seth Warner (Dover)
> >>
> >> recommended pretty highly, and it sells for about 10 bucks used,
> >> slightly more new (it's from Dover, after all). Be warned that it may
> >> be dull.
> >>
> >>
> >> > Also now I want to know if an aether is still likely...
> >>
> >> IMHO aether theory is absurd. It substitutes an unbelievably weird
> >> object (the aether) with bizarre physical properties for simple
> >> geometry and claims to have done something useful. What's more the
> >> aether itself is utterly undetectable, so believing in it is like
> >> believing in an invisible inaudible unsmellable six-foot-tall rabbit
> >> which follows you around wherever you go. I can't prove it's not there
> >> but why carry around the extra mental baggage?
> >
> > Maybe not entirely undetectable. What is your definition of Aether. A
> > scientist called EL
>
> A scientist called "EL"? Like "Doctor EL"? What kind of name is that?
> Do you by any chance mean the character who sometimes posts in this
> newsgroup?
>
> > wrote the following and I think it made sense
>
> You don't know enough _yet_ to have a valid opinion as to whether it makes
> sense.
>
> If you hit the books for the next year or two that may change.
>
> >
> > What do you think?
>
> I think you are clueless and arrogant but apparently sincere.
>
> --
> Nospam becomes physicsinsights to fix the email
> I can be also contacted through http://www.physicsinsights.org

$$ ^.
Re: Covariant Ether Theories & Special Relativity.
Re: 'STANDARD covariant CRACKED pottery (i.e. CRACKED-Tivity)'.
SR iNTRiNSiC REST energy = m*c^2. Brian A M Stuckless, Ph.T (Tivity).
GUESS, eM = eG+eK-L-2*ev = E-eK = eG-eV = eF+L = m1*c^2. End of POST.