Dear Sirs,
I think many knows the ideas due to Jules Henri Poincaré that the physics laws can be formally rewriten as a space-time curvature or as new geometry solely without forces. It is because the physics laws and geometry laws only together are verified in the experiment. So we can arbitrary choose the one of them.
Do you know any works, researchers who realized this idea. I understand that it is just fantasy as it is not proved in the experiment for all forces excepting gravitation.
Do you know works where three Newtons laws are rewritten as just space-time curvature or 5D space curvature or the like without FORCES. Kaluzi-Klein theory is only about electricity.
Anatoly, this is not exactly what you are asking for, since it isn't a geometric solution, however, you might be interested in the work done by Richard Feynman with John Archibald Wheeler, who was Feynman's thesis advisor at the time. They jointly worked on developing a different approach to studying electromagnetic (EM) radiation call "absorber theory."
They showed that EM interactions can be viewed as waves sent out by the emitter that move forward in time and waves sent by the absorber that move backwards in time.
This approach was later generalized into a full-blown interpretation of quantum mechanics by John Cramer. It is called the Transactional Interpretation. It says that all of the forces (except gravity) can be treated as transactions of energy and momentum through wave functions that move forward in time from the source and wave functions that move backwards in time from the absorber.
The idea of waves moving backwards in time is hard for many to accept, although Feynman showed that an electron moving forward in time is fully equivalent to a positron (anti-electron) moving backward in time.
However, the whole backwards in time issue was resolved later by Ruth Kastner when she developed a fully relativistic version of the transactional interpretation, which is called RTI (relativistic transactional interpretation.
The original goal of Feynman and Wheeler was to see if they could completely eliminate any need for a field in the description of forces and the transfer of energy. They were almost successful, but ended up concluding that there remained a very small amount of energy that represented the presence of a field that acted as a dampening effect. This is similar to the way the field of space acts as intertia on anything that accelerates. This field effect is very small, such as seen with the Lamb effect. The rest of the EM force is fully described by absorber theory.
Kastner later showed that other research done by Davies could convert this field effect into waves that flow from particles back on themselves. This self-energy can be used to model the small residual field effect that cannot be explained by absorber theory. This means no field is needed.
I discuss this in more detail in my paper published late last year:
Article The Lenses of Perception Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics
See pages 91-96 and 102-103. These sections include references to the papers by Feynman, Wheeler, Cramer, and Kasnter, if you want to follow up.
Hopefully this helps in some way.
Dear Anatoly A Khripov , you don't need to rewrite the Newtons laws. If you want to have an idea of how the physicists of the future will describe the gravitational field, please, take a look to the second tweet of this Twitter account: @jjrodrip
Hello Mr. Sydney Ernest Grimm
Yes I just want to do this ancient thing without QFT. Could you provide the references?
Anatoly, this is not exactly what you are asking for, since it isn't a geometric solution, however, you might be interested in the work done by Richard Feynman with John Archibald Wheeler, who was Feynman's thesis advisor at the time. They jointly worked on developing a different approach to studying electromagnetic (EM) radiation call "absorber theory."
They showed that EM interactions can be viewed as waves sent out by the emitter that move forward in time and waves sent by the absorber that move backwards in time.
This approach was later generalized into a full-blown interpretation of quantum mechanics by John Cramer. It is called the Transactional Interpretation. It says that all of the forces (except gravity) can be treated as transactions of energy and momentum through wave functions that move forward in time from the source and wave functions that move backwards in time from the absorber.
The idea of waves moving backwards in time is hard for many to accept, although Feynman showed that an electron moving forward in time is fully equivalent to a positron (anti-electron) moving backward in time.
However, the whole backwards in time issue was resolved later by Ruth Kastner when she developed a fully relativistic version of the transactional interpretation, which is called RTI (relativistic transactional interpretation.
The original goal of Feynman and Wheeler was to see if they could completely eliminate any need for a field in the description of forces and the transfer of energy. They were almost successful, but ended up concluding that there remained a very small amount of energy that represented the presence of a field that acted as a dampening effect. This is similar to the way the field of space acts as intertia on anything that accelerates. This field effect is very small, such as seen with the Lamb effect. The rest of the EM force is fully described by absorber theory.
Kastner later showed that other research done by Davies could convert this field effect into waves that flow from particles back on themselves. This self-energy can be used to model the small residual field effect that cannot be explained by absorber theory. This means no field is needed.
I discuss this in more detail in my paper published late last year:
Article The Lenses of Perception Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics
See pages 91-96 and 102-103. These sections include references to the papers by Feynman, Wheeler, Cramer, and Kasnter, if you want to follow up.
Hopefully this helps in some way.
Anatoly, the concept of force is used to describe interactions, including gravity. Einstein believed that force was not needed in relativity theory. And there were reasons for that. The analogue of the Newtonian force does not agree with Newton's gravity, see the article Okun in UFN, there are different longitudinal and transverse masses of the particles. If we consider the force according to the Lagrangian mechanics, its expression is non-covariant, the value depends on the choice of coordinates. However, I believe that the consideration of force in curvilinear space still gives some results. In the limit of weak gravity, its values asymptotically converge and give a Newtonian limit that allows us to determine the passive gravitational mass of light-likeArticle Application of Lagrange mechanics for analysis of the light-...
and material particles https://dxdy.ru/topic131090.html that are consistent with the active mass, which confirms Newton's 3rd law.Sincerely, Vladimir
Wladimir Belayev.
I fully agree it is all a matter about energi.
Kurt Wraae
Hi,
I consider this is the correct approach. I have tried to do it myself, and even got some success, if better explanations to observed anomalies can be considered as a such.
If you leave the "force" away, then you actually leave the mass away, and everything is just 4 dimensions...
My struggle walking in this path is documented here;
https://www.researchgate.net/project/QED-Theory-of-everything
Hi everyone,
My response to Anatoly’s question is going to come from a different but foundational direction. Everything in human life starts with “observations” that take shape as “mental artifacts.” The mental artifacts are then externalized and made accessible to others primarily through “words.” The words are always deficient representations of the mental artifacts. They are also always a mix of what we know and what we do not know. (For more details please see Hamid Rafizadeh, The Sucker Punch of Sharing, Archway, 2018.) There is a continuous effort to create “high-knowledge-content” words and “word products” we know as models. The question of whether to continue to use “force” or to switch to “space-time” is thus one of which words provide a higher knowledge content view of what we’re observing. Do the words time and space give us a higher knowledge content than “force”? So long as a community is satisfied with the knowledge content of the words it is using, it would rarely consider switching to another set of words.
Best
Space-time interests me from the practical side to increase the efficiency of solving engineering problems. Practical integration of space and time is an extremely important task.
Something close.
The basic GR field equation is a math transform. It takes the right hand side (RHS) set of equations transformed into a geometry to reduce the number of variables by 1 on the left hand side (LHS). It is a math identity to solve complex equations.
So, the RHS can be anything - even something physical. So, why not use the Newtonian force concept rather than the energy-stress concept. The LHS turns into a geometry of an ether (Newtonian type ether). So, gravitational forces of the masses create an ether and the divergence (the inverse transform) of the ether directs the masses. If the masses have electromagnetic forces, they too can be included in the RHS tensor. Or, the electric charges may be a property of the ether on the LHS. Then the QSSC source is easily added. As can the sink of STOE.
But then the complexity of the equations islike GR - better to use Newtonian methods (force vector addition). All that is needed is a method to handle the r=0 situation.
In solving the problem of space-time, learn how to solve practical tasks in this system.
Let us turn to dependence:
∆Yi=Q(t)ΔTi, (1)
where: ∆Y is the increment in volume of works; Q(t) is the productivity; ∆T is the period of time in question. The increment in volume of works is equal to the numerical value, created within the specific time interval. However, it is necessary to draw a fundamental conclusion. Taking into account that ∆Y is a vector, Q is a scalar, formula (1) should be represented in the form:
∆Yi=Q(t)ΔTi, (2)
since for retaining the equality in (1), it is necessary that ∆Тi should be a vector (tensor of the 1st rank). Hence follows ∆Тi ∆Yi, i. e. the vectors of the ∆Тi and of an increase in gains of works volume ∆Yi, ideally are collinear and are co-directed. Consequently, the time, connected with PP, will be as uneven as the volume of production and productivity etc.
Dear Anatoly,
Did you have a look at the Newton-Cartan theory, a formulation of Newtonian gravity that is really close to GR. You find the relevant references for instance in gr-qc/9604054.
The answer was given by Eisenhart, using the so-called Eisenhart lift-cf. Article The Eisenhart lift: A didactical introduction of modern geom...
for instance.
Newton's approach can be explained by the fact that the Green's function of a field in isotropic conditions equals a pulse response. Any distribution can be approached by a set of pulse responses. If that set is a coherent swarm, then the deformation induced by the swarm is the convolution of the location density distribution of the swarm and the Green's function of the field. Far enough from the gravitational center of the swarm, the deformation gets again the shape of the Green's function. However, in this region, a factor that is proportional to the mass of the swarm maps the two shapes together. So, the actual deformation of the swarm can be described by the gravitation potential g=MG/r, where r is the distance to the gravitational center of the swarm.
For example a normal distribution of pulses will cause a deformation that can be described by MG*ERF(r)/r. Here ERF(r) is the error function. At large values of r it equals MG/r.
The Green's function is a static pulse response. It is the integral over time of a corresponding dynamic pulse response. The dynamic pulse response behaves as a spherical shock front. The amplitude of this front follows the shape of the Green's function and diminishes with increasing radius r. At the instance of the pulse the field gets deformed, but the front quickly spreads this deformation over the field. So the volume of the Green's function stays inside the field and expands the field. However the deformation quickly fades away. This is why to keep the deformation in place, the dynamic pulses must recurrently be regenerated.
With other words, mass is only conserved when the mechanism that produces the pulses keeps doing its work in a constant way.
Practical integration of space and time is an extremely important task.
vectorial product leads to (at least) 1 more dimension, ergo: if time were not described by using vectors, then space-time would have not more dimensions as space itself.
Right thought. I believe that in the way of unification of physics and geometry we can expect serious practical results.
Dear Sirs,
@Hamid Rafizadeh points out how we need to change these constructions called "words" to be able to proceed.
I noticed this myself whilst trying to leave mass away from physics, as I consider it as a pseudo-thing which does not exist. This leads us very quickly to idea that acceleration is velocity / time. Which it is, buy then, what is accelerating if there is no mass, and everything is light? As then the speed is always constant!
This breaks our existing construction totally!
A new kind of massless acceleration can be created another way; Velocity squared / length. and this works even if the speed is a universal constant.
....to be continued....
In an earlier reply I have already pointed out that Newtonian gravity has, in perfect analogy to GR, been geometrically reformulated long ago by Cartan (1923, 1924) and Friedrichs (1928). Numerous authors (Havas, Trautman, Ehlers, Künzle) have in recent times elaborated on this. References are easily accessible for instance in gr-qc/9604054. In this approach even the field equations take the same form as Einstein's equations. Basically, in this formulation the Lorentz group is replaced by the Galilei group.
Dear Preston Ginn! Please inform the name of the journal and its number where your article "The Thomas Precession is the basis of the structure of matter and space ..." is published. . Sincerely. Vitaly Borovik
Read the chapter on field equations in "The Mathematics of Physical Reality"; http://vixra.org/abs/1904.0388
This freely accessible booklet explains the origin of gravitation and the origin of inertia.
This is the fact, that the building block of universe is a quantum mechanics. But in Newton and Einstein era, they did not know about this remarkable science. If we consider universe is working based on QM phenomenon, then the mechanical gravity of Newton and Einstein must be reviewed. Here is my challenge of rejecting the mechanical gravity https://www.academia.edu/37525574/Quantum_Mechanic_Gravity this article selected to 2019 Quantum Physics seminar in Paris and Osaka japan. Best regard
Anatoly A Khripov and All,
Ideas due to Jules Henri Poincaré that the physics laws can be formally rewriten as a space-time curvature or as new geometry solely without forces are very bad mathematical ideas, that do not belong to physics.
Please take into account that the theory may be based on mathematical or physical principles.
As for mathematical theory based on mathematical principles, everything is fine.
Similarly, when it comes to physical theory based on physical principles, everything is all right.
Problems arise when it comes to physical theory based on mathematical principles - as is the case of Einstein's theory of relativity, Lorentz transformations,...
In mathematics, the Poincaré conjecture is a theorem about the characterization of the 3-sphere, which is the hypersphere that bounds the unit ball in four-dimensional space. In 1994, Grigori Yakovlevich Perelman proved the soul conjecture. In 2003, he proved (confirmed in 2006) Thurston's geometrization conjecture. This consequently solved in the affirmative the Poincaré conjecture.
Mathematic with space - time kill physics.
Einstein's Theory of Relativity is a mathematical theory. Why is it wrong from the point of view of physics ?
Einstein's Procedure for Synchronizing Clocks John D. Norton Department of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh PA 15260. Homepage: www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton This page (with animated figures) is available at www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/goodies
John D. Norton's Homepage--redirect
Reactionaries and Einstein's Fame: “German Scientists for the Preservation of Pure Science,” Relativity, and the Bad Nauheim Meeting Jeroen van Dongen Einstein Papers Project California Institute of Technology Pasadena CA 91125, USA Institute for History and Foundations of Science Utrecht University P.O. Box 80.000 3508 TA Utrecht, the Netherlands
Nobel laureates in physics are mostly physicists, who mainly create and defend physics. Einstein never received a Nobel prize for relativity...
For nearly 100 years ago have been Nobel Prize winners said:
"- The theory of relativity is a mathematical and not a physical theory.
- The theory is far from being confirmed experimentally, the results of the solar eclipse expeditions allow other interpretations
- The principle of relativity is only valid for mass-dependent movements
- The theory of relativity contradicts the fundamental ideas about space and time: the Euclidean space and the usual ideas of time must remain binding. "
Doug Marman write:
"Richard Feynman with John Archibald Wheeler, who was Feynman's thesis advisor at the time. They jointly worked on developing a different approach to studying electromagnetic (EM) radiation call "absorber theory."
They showed that EM interactions can be viewed as waves sent out by the emitter that move forward in time and waves sent by the absorber that move backwards in time.
This approach was later generalized into a full-blown interpretation of quantum mechanics by John Cramer. It is called the Transactional Interpretation. It says that all of the forces (except gravity) can be treated as transactions of energy and momentum through wave functions that move forward in time from the source and wave functions that move backwards in time from the absorber."
An elegant answer on that thoughts are in book
New Trends in Physics, Slovak Academic Press, Bratislava 1996,
ISBN 80-85665-64-6.
Presentation on European Phys. Soc. 10th Gen. Conf. – Trends in Physics ( EPS 10) Sevilla ,
E 9. -13 September 1996, https://biocoreopen.org/ijnme/New-Trends-in-Physics-Extraordinary-proofs.pdf
Kinetic energy of a particle ( charge) moving at the velocity of v has two different values:
Kinetic energy of a particle ( charge)
Tkin id =mc^2 [ln |1-v/c|+ (v/c) / (1-v/c) ] in direction of motion of a particle ( charge)
It is realy as Newton´s kinetic energy,
where v is velocity of a particle ( charge) .
Kinetic energy of a particle ( charge) Tkin ad = mc^2 [ln |1+v/c|- (v/c) / (1+v/c) ] against direction of motion of a particle ( charge)
It is realy as Maxwell´s electromagnetic wave energy,
where v is velocity of a particle ( charge).
Dear Dr. Khripov,
We have experimentally shown that the String Open SO(11) and SO(23) Dimensions of the spacextime of Electronic Bombay Stock Exchange Networks which are globally connected by the internet and geosynchronous satellites and powered by sunlight and electric networks (directly variable with the stock exchange stocks and flows) can be explained by Econophysical differentiable systems classified and systems integrated equations (Mallick (2014, 2015), Mallick, Raychaudhury, Mallick and others (2019), Mallick, Hamburger & Mallick (2016, 2017, 2018)), thus establishing what we have called "Vector Diffeotopy of Embedding Jump Quantum Conductance" which we conjecture is Quantum Mechanically vectorially geometrically isotropic with Higgs Mechanics which we have defined as "Higgs-Mallick mechanics"with photon-phonon duality String Differentiable particle group (Rieman and Lie algebra) at RTP for Riemann Algebra Fundamental Standard Model.The existence of geodesic weights which resolves the information-energy Rikki tensor cylinder reservoirs with normalisation four laws discovered by us Mallick et. al. , establishes the classical-quantum spacetime world curvature (RHMHM Functor Algebra Calculus) at least can identify gravity and photon-phonon string duality curvature of spacetime and spacextime classical factorisation method of Econophysics which we have proved in the above. Using Dielectric Compounds for AGGNNnetwork circuits we have (Sandipan Mallick in particular this was his idea) a mothod of identifying the electromagnetic, weak and strong nuclear forces in such natural fundamental string networks perturbation and condensation to the stock exchange systems equilibrium in realtime and spacetime Poincare groups with Yang - Mills mass gap explained in this low dimensional experiment by the computed first of its kind RHMHM Internetwork Fine Structure Constant which establishes the QM interaction picture resolution by Rikki-Tensor also determined to be 4000/C (Mallick (2015), Mallick, Hamburger & Mallick and others (2016, 2017 & 2018), Mallick, Raychaudhury, Mallick and others (2019)) SR and GR in geodesy value (in the solar system). This intrepretes the string path integral also for the string control problem. I hope this has something in answer.
S.K.Mallick, S.Raychaudhury, S.Mallick and others,
RHMHM School of Mathematical Sciences Thinking,
USA, Japan, Russia, India (British Commonwealth)
Prof. Khripov,
We have also constructed a Field Theory out of such Poincare and Abelian Group Homologies and derived the VDEJQC Higgs-Mallick String Duality photon-phonon electromagnetic Maxwell type limits mathematical-statistically by converting transitivity problems into induction problems and solving them to obtain open and closed String Field Theories to derive Externetwork - "Artificial Genetic Gravitational Neural National Network" with sustainable satellite embedding in solar system (Mallick, Raychaudhury, Mallick and others (2019)).
S.K.Mallick, S.Raychaudhury, S.Mallick and others
The RHMHM School of Mathematical Sciences Thinking,
USA, Japan, Russia, India (British Commonwealth).
Prof. Kripov,
I am a Hony. Fellow of European Physical Society for "Integration of Scientific Fields" and a KBE for The Econophysics Field, may I not so humbly state. Integration of scientific fields along with the Econophysics Field experimental proofs establish somewhat what your question asks I believe. My collaborators are also working in these areas,
Earl Soumitra K. Mallick, Somak Raychaudhury, Earl Prince Sandipan Mallick and others,
The RHMHM School of Mathematical Sciences Thinking,
USA, Japan, Russia, India,
and our respective affiliations.
Dear Prof. Khripov,
F=ma =>dF=mdm + ada, by using the Third Law and STR, we have derived the Internetworked Fine Structure Constant with photon-phonon String Duality renormalisation setting da^hat=0, canonically for experimental solution, hence the RHMHM FAC String Matching Field Theory GTR value gets solved by dF=mdm using Plancks Constant in the Heisenberg equation and using the DeBroglie limit, with mass being intrepreted as equilibrium weight from the stock market equilibrium equation derived by us as proof of the Pvs.NP and other millenium problems and the fundamentally resolved by Higgs-Mallick mechanics AGGNNNetworks fundamental (YM) networks. The fundamental length is the RHMHM InFSC at RTP under the systems classified and systems integrated by using dielectric compound of Sandipan Mallick to count valence electrons stock and flow with Vector Diffeotopy of Em,bedding Jump Quantum Conductance from an Econemetric Theory which proves that the Rational Expectations Cybernetic Equilibrium with National Globalised Stock Markets is independant of all "sunspot activities" i.e. String Perturbation and Condensation. This therefore by calculus explains all the fundamental forces in the exsperimental system and is sunstituted by our four laws of Econophysics (Systems) that we have discovered et.al. We particularly thank Prof. Karl Shell, Prof. Mukul Majumdar for the Rational Expectations Econometrics.
Earl Soumitra K. Mallick, Somak Raychaudhury, Earl Prince Sandipan Mallick and others,
The RHMHM School,
USA, Japan, Russia, India
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Mathematics