- 10,410
- 1,588
As I think about the issue more, I h ave to note that my calculations were NOT based on an experimental defintion for energy (or momentum), but rather on symmetry principles, i.e. Noether's theorem.
Most active posters in this thread are already familiar, but for any lurkers who may not be, I'll point to the wiki article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noether's_theorem.
I do believe tying the theory to experiment is still a great goal - I just don't think my approach necessarily realizes that goal yet.
The theoretical approach I used is based on space-time symmetries, and it is open to questions of how we break space-time into space + time. Clock syncrhonization defines which set of points are considered to be "at the same time", so it's integral to the issue, but not something I've thought about enough yet.
Specifically, it seemed clear to me that my approach tied energy and momentum to a specific way of dividing space-time into space+time, and it's unclear how this affects the experiments.
Most active posters in this thread are already familiar, but for any lurkers who may not be, I'll point to the wiki article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noether's_theorem.
I do believe tying the theory to experiment is still a great goal - I just don't think my approach necessarily realizes that goal yet.
The theoretical approach I used is based on space-time symmetries, and it is open to questions of how we break space-time into space + time. Clock syncrhonization defines which set of points are considered to be "at the same time", so it's integral to the issue, but not something I've thought about enough yet.
Specifically, it seemed clear to me that my approach tied energy and momentum to a specific way of dividing space-time into space+time, and it's unclear how this affects the experiments.