Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-3.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2024 05:25:18 +0000
Subject: Re: Larger Collected Reasoning 2024
Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.logic,sci.physics.relativity
References: <S4KdnWq7DcVrNv76nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2024 21:25:28 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <S4KdnWq7DcVrNv76nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <7cicneYW4rajM_76nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 2624
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-tw8D+vNheBIzlRcsZypaGJo/inGeLMlnTi+KgPilNWHUBQp6c+mP6ZT3ZmczBEUJlClkHjKnDw29MHT!0Adz8LhQslCFhkcbdVz52W1ZIE6HgO0Uqk4wljPN/oHVjWoikZiahXGpagBatCuyGUXOZEarEMg=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 121412

Thanks GG. Then there's the idiom of always saying thanks, in the
expectation of what are perceived as directives, since it's concluded
voluntary. Today's is about the theories of relativity. Consider
space-contraction for keeping continuity, and, differentiating
space-contraction-linear and space-contraction-rotational with regards
to for example "neutral linac / charged cyclotron intersection" to test
for the difference separating space-contraction-linear and
space-contraction-rotational, or similarly "rigid and rotating atomic
clock lattices", to find respective humps in the linac and bumps in the
cyclotron.

Thank you for your inquiry about the theories of relativity and space
contraction. I'm ready to discuss your ideas about differentiating
between linear and rotational space contraction.

To clarify, are you proposing to use a "neutral linac / charged
cyclotron intersection" or "rigid and rotating atomic clock lattices" to
experimentally distinguish between these two types of space contraction?

Please provide more details about your specific experimental setup and
the expected outcomes. This will help me better understand your proposed
approach and provide more specific insights.

Thanks GG, as per previous conversations, it's described that abstractly
those "configurations of experiment" subject to "energies of experiment"
would via any non-null result so establish that, yes. Reflect on this.
The idea is that "configurations of experiment" and "energies of
experiment" help establish control, or mostly about reducing or
expanding dimensionality, and in the far-field or extremes, as that
"configuration and energy of experiment" defines the overall
"parameters". Reflect on this with raised questions, or objections, or
alternatives, especially if there is a mode of language that would have
other terms with the same meaning.

I'm not able to access previous conversations or specific details about
the proposed experiments. However, I can provide some general
reflections on the concept of using "configurations of experiment" and
"energies of experiment" to establish control and explore different
dimensions of space contraction.

Key Considerations:

Experimental Design and Control:
Precision and Sensitivity: The experimental setup must be highly precise
and sensitive to detect subtle effects of space contraction, especially
if they are expected to be small.
Control Variables: Identifying and controlling relevant variables, such
as temperature, magnetic fields, and gravitational influences, is
crucial to isolate the effects of space contraction.
Calibration and Standardization: Establishing accurate calibration
procedures and standardized measurement techniques is essential for
reliable data collection and analysis.

Energy and Configuration:
Energy Range: The energy range of the experiment should be carefully
chosen to probe different regimes of space contraction. High-energy
experiments may reveal effects that are not observable at lower energies.
Configuration Flexibility: The experimental setup should be flexible
enough to accommodate different configurations and allow for systematic
exploration of various parameters.

Theoretical Framework:
Relativistic Effects: A clear understanding of the expected relativistic
effects, such as time dilation and length contraction, is necessary to
interpret experimental results.
Quantum Mechanics: Quantum mechanical effects may also play a role in
certain experiments, especially at high energies or in systems with
small dimensions.

Potential Challenges and Limitations:

Technical Difficulties: Implementing experiments at the necessary
precision and energy scales can be technically challenging and
resource-intensive.
Interpretation of Results: Interpreting experimental results can be
complex, and it is essential to carefully consider potential systematic
errors and uncertainties.
Theoretical Ambiguities: In some cases, theoretical predictions may be
ambiguous or uncertain, making it difficult to draw definitive
conclusions from experimental data.

Alternative Approaches:

Gravitational Wave Astronomy: Observing gravitational waves from
astrophysical sources can provide insights into the nature of spacetime
and potentially test predictions of general relativity related to space
contraction.
Precision Measurements of Fundamental Constants: Precise measurements of
fundamental constants, such as the speed of light and the fine-structure
constant, can be used to test the consistency of physical theories and
potentially reveal deviations from classical predictions.

I would be interested in learning more about the specific details of
your proposed experiments, including the expected outcomes and the
theoretical framework that supports them. This would allow me to provide
more specific feedback and potential insights.

Thanks GG. Modern experiments in the giga- and tera-electron volts
definitely are said to demonstrate space-contraction, so, here it's
assumed that it's within design parameters to achieve the energies, and
that the configuration of experiment is quite simple, linear neutral
linac particle beam, rotational charged cyclotron particle beam. Then,
"configuration and energy of experiment" are considered reasonable
mention of the matters of design of experiment, as elaborated. So, it's
quite simple a linear neutral particle beam and rotational or circular
charged particle beam, which according to the "standard" theory would
not interact, that interfering at all would be non-null falsifying that
space-contraction is separate space-contraction-linear and
space-contraction-rotational. Weigh on the contemplations and
deliberations about this.


relativity and open up new avenues of research.

Further Exploration:

It would be valuable to consult with experts in particle physics and
accelerator physics to refine the experimental design and assess the
feasibility of such an experiment. Additionally, theoretical
calculations and simulations could help predict potential outcomes and
guide the experimental setup.

While the proposed experiment is conceptually intriguing, it is
important to carefully consider the practical challenges and potential
limitations before proceeding.

Thanks GG, that's quite so, while "theoretical physics" is certainly
welcome to just make this up, that "experimental physics" is its own
practice, yet the principles of design of linacs and cyclotrons may be
simple, and even that largely existing designs may simply be brought
together, with regards to the more-or-less understood principles of
operation. Here are some quotes rather abstractly about theoretical
considerations, that will follow. Consider this.

I understand your point about the practicality of bringing together
existing designs and principles to conduct the proposed experiment.
While theoretical physics can provide valuable insights, experimental
physics ultimately relies on careful design, precise measurements, and
rigorous analysis.

I'm ready to consider the abstract quotes you'll provide. Please share
them, and I'll do my best to analyze them in the context of the proposed
experiment and the broader theoretical framework.


Thanks GG. "The Riemann metric and Riemann tensor for Riemannian geometry
is just a neat way to make a simplification of an idealistic
gravitational well involving a large central body and a
small satellite." Comment as you would.


The quote presents a simplified view of the Riemann metric and tensor,
which are fundamental tools in general relativity. While it's true that
these mathematical constructs can be used to describe the gravitational
field around a massive body like a planet or star, they are much more
general and powerful than that.

Here are some key points to consider:

General Applicability: The Riemann metric and tensor can be used to
describe a wide range of geometries, not just those related to gravity.
They can be applied to any curved spacetime, including those with exotic
topologies or exotic matter distributions.
Intrinsic Geometry: The Riemann tensor captures the intrinsic curvature
of spacetime, which is a property of the spacetime itself, independent
of any coordinate system or embedding in a higher-dimensional space.
Geodesic Motion: The geodesic equation, derived from the metric tensor,
describes the motion of particles in curved spacetime, including the
motion of planets and stars in a gravitational field.
Gravitational Waves: The Riemann tensor also plays a crucial role in the
theory of gravitational waves, which are ripples in the curvature of
spacetime that propagate at the speed of light.

While the quote's simplified interpretation may be helpful for certain
intuitive understanding, it's important to recognize the full power and
generality of the Riemann metric and tensor in the context of general
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========