My View On Fysics : Away With Distance

  • Thread starter Thread starter marlon
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the challenges posed by tensor calculations in theoretical physics, particularly in describing the Lorentzian and flat nature of space-time. It suggests that if the concept of distance were abandoned, tensors might become unnecessary for maintaining covariance. The conversation also highlights the importance of physical dualities, such as T-duality in string theory, which implies a fundamental limit to distance measurements in the universe. Participants debate whether dualities can ever be surpassed by distance, emphasizing the complexity and laborious nature of tensor calculations. The overall sentiment is a search for simplification in these mathematical processes to enhance understanding in physics.
marlon
Messages
3,779
Reaction score
11
The biggest problem in theoretical fysics are the calculation-horrors that come along with working with tensors. These mathematical objects are necessary in order to describe our space-time-manifold, yet they all are necessary because our "world" has to be Lorentzian and flat when viewed at locally. In this flat world we like to measure things.

If we were to be able to give up the concept of distance then tensors would not anymore be necessary in order to maintain covariance, right ?

i think that the concept of fysical dualities is the most fundamental off all. Like T-duality shows us in string theory, there is a minimal distance at which we should study the universe, because when looking at even smaller scales the fysical laws and rules would not change anymore. Here distance has been beaten by dualities.

Have dualities ever been beaten by distance ? I think not...


How bout that for a change, hmm?

greetz
marlon
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi marlon,

A definition for a point:
A singleton set p that can be defined only by tautology ('='), where p has no internal parts.

A definition for an interval (segment):
A singleton set s that can be defined by tautology ('=') or '<' or '>', where s has no internal parts.

aridno said:
1. What is a singleton?
2. What is "="?
1. Singleton set http://mathworld.wolfram.com/SingletonSet.html
2. Tautology (x is itself or x=x).
aridno said:
3. What is an "no internal parts"?
3. Non divisible or Urelement (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Urelement.html).


Can you please define an Urelement between p and s?
 
Last edited:
Universes with large scale factors are supposed to be equivalent
to universes with small scale factors under T duality.This means that a universe with
a larger redshift ,for the same distance, as another universe, should be physically
the same as the other universe.For this to be correct then dark energy cannot be anything exotic - it must transform under Tsymmetry like other forms of matter- it must be a field of some kind, some kind of radiation, or some kind of baryonic matter.
 
What is fysics?

Tensors are just linear algebra; what is so horrifying?

Tensors are not based upon a concept of length.
 
Hurkyl said:
What is fysics?

Tensors are just linear algebra; what is so horrifying?

Tensors are not based upon a concept of length.


I am just saying that the calculation of tensors is mostly very very elaborate and much work. I am wondering how this calucations can be simplified.

Just like we are always looking for symmetries in order to make calculations more easy

regards

marlon
 
I think it's easist first to watch a short vidio clip I find these videos very relaxing to watch .. I got to thinking is this being done in the most efficient way? The sand has to be suspended in the water to move it to the outlet ... The faster the water , the more turbulance and the sand stays suspended, so it seems to me the rule of thumb is the hose be aimed towards the outlet at all times .. Many times the workers hit the sand directly which will greatly reduce the water...
Back
Top