Recent content by binbagsss

the external supervisor. but i also did some analysis of results. Honestly, I know full-well he did not nothing but read it at the end and reworded things.

Yes, my situation is a little complicated. I considered moving a few times but concluded it's better to work with. I will explain later on. Re. It affecting my career, potentially. And he is about to retire and it's not even in his area of speciality so it has zero influence on his career by...

No nothing was deleted. Oh I believe it was indeed malicious. I will explain more detail shortly.

since there's no time for extra research yeh maybe i just stay in good terms :( my viva won't be for about a year though!

just venting my frustrations? so okay that's totally normal? it's okay to change contributions and not tell the phd student you're changing them from the ones they agreed with?! well ok. no wonder ppl say academia is toxic.

my point is it takes away a decent amount of work. so may be the difference of passing with minor or major corrections. no i write up over the next few months, not supposed to do anymore research. my internal supervisor will ensure that doesn't happen.

can you explain why it selects a rest frame/ point me to some links? many thanks

I recently published a paper with my two supervisors. I am a second author, which i agree with , I was not first. However, the article I was shown that I agreed to listed DIFFERENT author contributions to the ones I was shown before submission. In particular, the paper was modified in this...

The energy flux expression is given by the above in some text. Why isn't this wrote as ##S^{\alpha}_0##? Because ##0## is a specified index right so not an index as such, but, E.g when one refers to the components of the energy-momentum tensor as follows , one would write ##T^{i0}##, not...

pretty sure i said a hundredf times i dont think its a four vector. i said in miskowski s-t. i.e. what most textbooks or lit would regard as minkowski. question still hasn;t really been answered

but is it not true for #ii# general expression you get for the second term ##-L##. Why wouldn't one sub that in? "Note that this is not a tensor expression. It is simply three expressions". That is like saying obtainin an expression for ##T_{i0}## is not a vector. Obviously it is the energy...

yes !! but ##\eta_{uv}=diag(1,-1,-,1,-1)## . has the same value for the spatial compoentns so one would plug it in rather than leaving it in component form...

OP was the question. If consdiering ##T_{ij}## where ##i=j## then on the first term the two rank tensor will be apparent in the index noration, for the lsat term ##\eta^{ij}## the rank 2 tensor is not apparent as ##eta_{ij}=\delta^{ij}##, would just get ##-L##

The formula gives ##T^{\mu nu}##. Isn't that just like saying ##T^{\mu \nu}## are components, rather than a rank - 2 tensor? Why can't ##T^{ij}## denote the 3d matrix running over the indices 1,2,3, rather than the case ##\mu =1,2,3,4##? what else should I use to write this then? So you're...

##T_{i0}=T_{0i}## the momentum flux /energy flux is a vector...?