| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<exidnRBwBvPQO4X1nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@giganews.com> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!local-4.nntp.ord.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 05 May 2025 11:51:41 +0000 Subject: Re: The proof of Noether theorem Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity References: <183c8f1d7e4023e0$3256502$1799812$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com> From: Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 5 May 2025 04:51:28 -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: <183c8f1d7e4023e0$3256502$1799812$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <exidnRBwBvPQO4X1nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@giganews.com> Lines: 29 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-g4cR4RHUa7x2MlMCFbB7aBgKxaYPInMQoflXGQ2Xm1VyEJjzFxZXGEsxFYASZTKJ+juU8YIwmyiPOk1!VgwbNiH15gmtDGemVztbIao+576QH2NYFIyYzxDlBGoLZcq1Pgs5axBgVZma2VOTLyZE+yDpwjA= 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: 2129 On 05/04/2025 11:55 PM, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > Well, Pythagorean theorem had about > 120 proofs - and is still [allegedly] > not valid for the world we inhabit. > > So, how about Noether theorem? Proven > or not, the question whether it is valid > should still be open I guess? It's really simple and follows from Pauli principle. I.e., that one thing cannot be in two different places. So, it's often represented as that two quantities have the same sum, "conservation", simply as of after about a symmetry, "same difference" on both sides, any what's an "invariant". The, "continuity" law is often written rather simply, "equals zero", so of course the "conservation" and "continuity" laws are inextricable. Then, "continuity" law can also be written as "conservation" law, and vice versa. Then, a usual idea in extended bodies is that it's more properly, "continuity law".