Sujet : Re: Spacetime
De : ttt_heg (at) *nospam* web.de (Thomas Heger)
Groupes : sci.physics.relativityDate : 06. Jul 2024, 07:53:36
Autres entêtes
Message-ID : <les4evF8eadU1@mid.individual.net>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
Am Freitag000005, 05.07.2024 um 14:25 schrieb gharnagel:
Thomas Heger wrote:
>
Am Donnerstag000004, 04.07.2024 um 18:39 schrieb gharnagel:
>
Thomas Heger wrote:
>
One unusual assumption is: points may have features and more than
three
dimensions.
>
I think points are nonexistent. They are a mental invention to
express
geometrical concepts, just like numbers were invented to express
mathematical concepts.
>
Sure: a point is actually meant as coordinate in space, hence not really
real in a coordinate free space.
And space is coordinate-free.
But real things are usually meant to consist of something.
>
If spacetime is real and a smooth continuum, than spacetime would
consists of 'pointlike elements'.
Which is why it's not real.
You forgot something important:
If you say ' Which is why', you need to say: why you think so.
Whitout an explanation your ' Which is why' statement is nonsense.
iow: why do you think, that 'pointlike elements' are nonsense in a smooth continuum?
If so, we need to build particles out of these 'points', if we like to
combine GR and QM.
>
This sounds strange, to say the least, but is actually quite good,
because it allows such things as 'big bang' or pair-creation.
Fields seem to work okay.
Then we need something, that could eventually behave the way, that
particles could be a substructur under a certain perspective.
>
I meant that a certain type of quaternions would match the discription
and wrote my 'book' about this idea.
Quaternions are mathematical concepts, not real.
I wanted something different than one of the usual
'materialistic'
concepts, to which string-theory actually belongs.
>
That's where ALL of physics IS.
>
Sure,
>
So you agree that your idea is not physics? Hmmm.
>
no, not quite.
>
It's physics, but I'm not a physicist.
>
That is similar to other professions, say medicine:
So you want a nonprofessional to operate on you?
Science is not medicine.
It is actually possible to think about scientific problems, even if you are not a professional in that particular field, because you are not treating other humans with an operation.
I'm not a professional, but that doesn't mean, that my remedy does not
heal.
>
...
>
TH
We'll have to agree to disagree. I think you like your idea too much.
Well, I try to promote my own idea. That seems to be fair and legal.
You may promote your own ideas, too, even if I would disagree.
And I really hope, you like your own ideas, even if I wouldn't.
This is an important aspect of science.
...
TH