Recent content by Rebel

Thank you for the very nice reply. I guess there could be some relation among CDT, Causets and others, for example it's direct to associate some models Ising-like that sometimes Ambjorn used for CDT and some discrete models that could evolve as graphs in general or posets in particular for...

Right, but what I was referring with the partial derivative not was the derivatives in the taylor expansion, but to the terms that are left after this polynomial expansion. However, is much simpler the last by you.

But it is a bad understanding of the divergence, even Nabla is not just "the sum of partial derivatives"... there is no "bridge" with angles between vectors here since the divergence is an operation in a vector field giving an scalar, Nabla or Del is a differential vectorial operator, not a...

The simplest way I can put it is that in the unprimed frame the Lagrangian depends just on the square of the velocity, and if L(v^{2}) is a polynomial function or put it in terms of the Taylor expansion, the only terms that survive after taking into account those at first order in...

Yeah, I like the new papers you put, mainly, Krasnov's and Barret's ones... also, I just comment that the papers by A. Perez, Corichi and likely the one of Rovelli and krasnov are related with the workshop of Valencia; there was a talk about SU(2) Chern-Simons related with LQG by one of he...

You can visualize things like if there is an observer on the ground and a train traveling in one direction when someone throws a ball or anything in the same direction... the addition of velocities in special relativity for two objects moving towards same direction (for simplicity) with...

The point is that the book precises V_{jj} being function of the difference of some vector associated to the particles, that is not generally of velocities for instance as you say, but for differences of them in such a way that (1.33) still holds but not (1.34), when now the dependence is not...

How is that about isomorphism and diffeomorphism? Can you please deep a little bit more in this?

But initially it was put as relevant for the thread, since the initial claim of the starter was that there is no time without mass... surely was the same mistake, as you were thinking all for matter then. There are different views about time in quantum gravity, so I cannot be so sure as...

What has all this to do with the initial discussion? Also, I didn't understand that of " the inevitable result" ... was related to the rotation on axis or with traslational movement? Actually all assertions seemed so vague to me, liked much a precise statement (chaos for millenia?). By the...

Of course, I just pointed out the position respect to the overwhelming experimental support for relativity.

Did you tried to say something like " the linear momentum and angular momentum of a mass crossing the horizon of a BH"? For instance, divergence would be useful for studying if there are sources or sinks in a field (for a BH the divergence of the gravitational field is negative as usual).

I see more probable that theorists would look at this supossed new findings and study what is wrong with the experiment. :rolleyes:

I also regret that I did not presented anything, but I'm also ethusiast about LQG and hope in the near future would be giving any modest aportation.

Did you attended the conferences? I guess I read it before from you in another post. It's nice they put the videos... I was in the workshop in Valencia (my first time) and Barbero told they would put the videos in the same page, but I don't see them anywhere.