Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2024 19:58:23 +0000
Subject: Re: The failure of the unified field theory means general relativity
 fails.
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
References: <693b1f71c994c268d60983eb81fc6aaa@www.novabbs.com>
 <rQzdO.250256$RcM6.3626@fx13.ams4>
 <17db55a7e5709ab7$1933$480477$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com>
 <9283a49bcc091b1f621ebd566d650a38@www.novabbs.com>
 <fridnXzRMeebPOr7nZ2dnZfqlJ-dnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <6677e170$0$11724$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
 <GgOdnRiQkYyT3ef7nZ2dnZfqlJ-dnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <ldv7jcFpoddU9@mid.individual.net>
 <hRycnWu7NvCFvub7nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <667bc249$0$11713$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
 <fLmcnSyR2vOM7OH7nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com>
 <6686f816$0$3283$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
 <5iudnThNzPCrnRr7nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com>
 <668842bc$0$7508$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
 <L4ecnY0vyKwbCBX7nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <6689a154$3$3899$426a34cc@news.free.fr>
 <hzWdnc3fgeyaYBT7nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <668a7047$0$11706$426a34cc@news.free.fr>
 <qpycnQZP2ZapaRf7nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <668baa12$1$3285$426a34cc@news.free.fr>
 <1w2dnUn8G_Nk0xH7nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <668eac20$1$11688$426a34cc@news.free.fr>
From: Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2024 12:58:36 -0700
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: <668eac20$1$11688$426a34cc@news.free.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <dkadnXQ-dad9ehP7nZ2dnZfqnPQAAAAA@giganews.com>
Lines: 167
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-d2N5Gkqe/6Zcnz02a2kHkjjt+e4qSKzTv6ZugumpjeFQomIRzfL2e/ilkKpZ6SSbNVyONaKz4w3ETDD!5rVAsqO2UnpmKxZ8H0ir8zmLNzBHyBjinuxoNVg6IyAxa0AXCWCcMk4CgOsP4N1Bo9fifyoAMweU!Vw==
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: 8391

On 07/10/2024 08:43 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 07/08/2024 01:57 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>> Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 07/07/2024 03:39 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>>> Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 07/06/2024 12:56 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>>>>> Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 07/05/2024 12:00 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 07/04/2024 12:29 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 06/26/2024 12:24 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 06/24/2024 11:49 PM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am Dienstag000025, 25.06.2024 um 05:57 schrieb Tom Roberts:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nope. YOU have imposed specific units onto the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> formula/equation. The equation itself does not impose any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particular units on its variables and constants [@], it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> merely requires that they be self-consistent.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           [@] There are many systems of units in common
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           use. You seem to think there is only one.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A forteriori, any result that depends on any particular
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> choice of units (or dimensions) is unphysical.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, of course. Good point. Similarly, any result that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depends on choice of coordinates is unphysical.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not quite...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Because velocity is 'relative' (relative in respect to what you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regard as 'stationary'), kinetic energy is frame dependent.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since the used coordinate system defines 'stationary', you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> need a coordinate system for kinetic energy and that for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> practically everything else.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TH
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When I hear "unphysical" I think it means "in the mathematical
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> representation and having no attachment to the physical
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> representation, in the system of units of the dimensional
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> analysis in the geometric setting".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The dimensional analysis and attachment to geometry and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> arithmetic usually is about the only "physical" there is.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dimensional analysis has nothing to do with physics. Dimensions
>>>>>>>>>>>>> are man-made conventions. Nothing would change if the whole
>>>>>>>>>>>>> concept had never been invented.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Geometry and arithmetic and the objects of analysis and so on.)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Things like "negative time" and "anti-deSitter space" are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unphysical, as are the non-real parts of complex analysis,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usually, though for example if you consider the Cartanian as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> essentially different from the Gaussian-Eulerian, complex
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> analysis, then the Majorana spinor makes an example of a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> detectable observable, though, one might aver that that's its
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real part, in the hypercomplex.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, yes, but that is another meaning of 'unphysical,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Yet, "conservation", i.e. "neither the destruction or creation",
>>>>>>>>>>>> of quantities, is exactly as according to the quantity its units.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Conservation laws do no depend on units and dimensions in any way.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The, "dimensionless", when a usual sort of "dimensional analysis"
>>>>>>>>>>>> is the Buckingham-Pi approach, is a detachment of sorts from
>>>>>>>>>>>> the "dimensional analysis".
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, standard dimensional analysis,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Oh, here that's called 'dimensionless analysis'.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That's either an error or a silly neologism,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [Higgs irrelevancies]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Quantities, and their derivations, have implicit units,
>>>>>>>> about them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 'Implicit unit' is not a physical concept,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> [unrelated stuff]
>>>>>> Also "Nessie's hump".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, implicits, definitely do have a physical concept attached,
>>>>>> and force, is a function of time.
>>>>>
>>>>> Word salad: Yes.
>>>>> Clarity about 'Implied units': No,
>>>>>
>>>>> Jan
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    From an article the other day:
>>> [snip yet another completely unrelated article]
>>>
>>>> Now I excuse me while I consider a belittling
>>>> condescension then refrain.
>>>
>>> And still not a word about what 'implied units' might be,
>>>
>>> Jan
>>>
>>
>> "What can't you reaD? This has been all about it."
>>
>> Hmm..., not very helpful.
>>
>> Force: is parameterized by time,
>> force is a function of time.
>>
>> In Einstein's theory, "Relativity",
>> "Relativity" has that the Space-Time
>> is an differential-system of inertial-systems,
>> parameterized by a "the time".
>>
>> So, it's implicit, and the implicits here reflect
>> paramterizations of functions who symbolic representations
>> represent algebraic quantities, and "implicit" has
>> its usual meaning from differential analysis.
>>
>>
>> Then, implicits like "the infinitely-many implicit
>> quantitiers in front of each variable in a logical
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========