Re: SpaceTime

On 06/02/2024 07:12 PM, gharnagel wrote:

Ross Finlayson wrote:

>
On 06/02/2024 04:22 PM, gharnagel wrote:

>
More invalid analogies.

>

Yeah, if you assume causality, then tachyons can't be fantastical,
they're only the result of something that is or did.
>
The neutrino physics are mostly about supersymmetry.

>
Nope.  Neutrinos are firmly ensconced in the Standard model of
particle physics, while supersymmetric particles are not.
>

If you assume lack of causality it's pretty easy to arrive at
itself.

>
That's the problem with the conventional view of FTL phenomena.
It comes from the Lorentz transform:
>
(1) dx' = gamma(dx - v dt)
(2) dt' = gamma(dt - v dx/c^2)
>
 From that comes
>
dx'/dt' = u' = (dx - v dt)/(dt - v dx/c^2)
>
u' = (u - v)/(1 - uv/c^2)
>
u' becomes infinite when u = c^2/v, and infinity is a red flag
in physics.  It means that the math becomes useless at and beyond
that point.  Physicists, who should know better, have persisted
into that real and come up with all kinds of frivolous assertions
like time going backwards, negative energy, causality violation
and a "reinterpretation principle."

Mathematics really owes physics more and better
mathematics of the super-classical and infinitary
and the law(s) of large numbers, mathematical
physics is entirely subject to mathematical formalism
and the ingenuity of mathematical forms.
Relativity is rather simplified with GR being primary
and SR being local, and what remains is mass/energy
equivalence and a cosmological constant reflecting
time.
Then, the linear mass/energy equivalence
is quite Galilean, while the rotational is
special in both the spatial and spacial,
and there's lots of data from both
linear particle accelerators, and, cyclotrons.