Text Size
Facebook Twitter More...

On Feb 19, 2012, at 2:43 PM, Paul Murad wrote:

Guys:
 
I have sat quietly over this for about a week regarding this conversation. I have two trivial questions.
 
First, Einstein did this about a century ago.


Jack: That's correct.

Murad: How come you all are still arguing about these issues?

Jack: Good question.

Murad: One would have assumed by now, we should know what is going on by now.  If not, then mankind is really dumb!

Jack: Excellent observation! ;-)
 
Murad: Second, you have a Coriolis force that works but other forces makes no sense?

Jack: That's not what I said. I don't know what Jim or Z said. Coriolis, centrifugal - all inertial fictitious forces are coded into the the symmetric torsion-free metric Levi-Civita-Christoffel connection that works in globally flat Minkowski space-time of 1905 SR as well as the curved space-time of 1916 GR. The former is a limiting case of the latter. "Fictitious" means there is no g-force on the observed test particle from them. However, there are real g-forces on accelerometers clamped to the detectors measuring the motion of the test particle.

Murad: That sounds like nonsense. Forces have to go into the stress-energy tensor unless you are pulling out the Coriolis force into the curvature tensor. The issue is how do you segregate it from the force balance to do this and still satisfy conservation or is this the crux of the issue?

Jack: Fictitious forces are at the level of the connection. Curvature is the covariant curl of the connection with itself in a self-referential way.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_curvature_tensor

All the UNIVERSAL inertial fictitious forces are already there in Minkowski spacetime.  Therefore, curvature is independent from them. Fictitious forces are an optical illusion caused by the purely arbitrary contingent non-geodesic motion of the detector/observer.

The fault Dear Murad lies not with the test particles, but within ourselves. ;-)

pun on Shakespeare's Julius Caesar
 
Murad: Sorry for my ignorance...
 
Paul Murad
CEO
Morningstar Applied Physics, LLC
www.morningstarap.com
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it." data-scaytid="64">This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

 

From: Paul Zielinski <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it." data-scaytid="66">This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
To: "This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it." data-scaytid="67">This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it." <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it." data-scaytid="68">This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2012 3:18 PM
Subject: Re: Misner Thorne Wheeler p. 63 no centrifuge redshift & speed of light in accelerating frames

If you interpret this as meaning that centrifugal forces are not really forces, but only *look* like forces in rotating frames of reference. then it makes sense.


Jack: That's been my crystal clear position all along.

Z: The underlying inertial effects are real, but they are not really due to the operation of *forces*.

Jack: That's right if you mean the observed test particle. It's not right if you mean the CLAMPED observer-detector forced to move off a time-like geodesic in the objectively real local tetrad-spin connection fields that are general coordinate transformation invariant local scalar 0-rank tensors. The four tetrad Cartan 1-forms e^I transform as 4-vector under the local LIF --> LIF' Lorentz group, and the six spin connection Cartan 1-forms S^I^J are not an antisymmetric 2nd rank tensor under the local Lorentz group.

Z: Then it becomes clear that purely kinematical fictitious forces (such as Coriolis forces) are fictitious in the much deeper sense that  there is no underlying objective effect, that they are *purely* a matter of appearances.

Jack: Yes, for test particle. No, for the CLAMPED accelerometers on the detectors whose pointers move off zero when their twins CLAMPED on the test particle do not!

Z: As long as we clearly distinguish between these two different definitions of "fictitious", there should be no confusion.

Jack: Subject to the distinction above that you did not make.


On 2/19/2012 03:05, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it." data-scaytid="43">This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. wrote:

All of the confusion about inertial reaction forces, I think, can be traced back to elementary physics where we all learned that centrifugal forces were allegedly not "real".  Rather, they were allegedly fictive, and the only "real force" was the centrepital force causing the rock on the end of the string being swung around you to deviate from inertial motion in a straight line.

So Jim I am still in the dark about how you related the fictitious forces to Mach's Principle. I would not do so. I would related the "jerk" radiation reaction force to Mach's principle, but that is not an F = ma force at all.

Category: MyBlog

Categories ...

't Hooft 100 Year Star Ship Abner Shimony accelerometers action-reaction principle Aephraim Sternberg Alan Turing Albert Einstein Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer American Institute of Physics Andrija Puharich Anthony Valentin Anton Zeilinger Antony Valentini anyon Apple Computer Artificial Intelligence Asher Peres Back From The Future Basil Hiley Bell's theorem Ben Affleck Ben Libet Bernard Carr Bill Clinton black body radiation Black Hole black hole firewall black hole information paradox black holes Bohm brain waves Brian Josephson Broadwell Cambridge University Carnot Heat Engine Central Intelligence Agency CIA Clive Prince closed time like curves coherent quantum state Consciousness conservation laws Cosmic Landscape Cosmological Constant cosmology CTC cyber-bullying Dancing Wu Li Masters Dark Energy Dark Matter DARPA Daryl Bem David Bohm David Deutsch David Gross David Kaiser David Neyland David Tong de Sitter horizon Dean Radin Deepak Chopra delayed choice Demetrios A. Kalamidas Demetrios Kalamidas Dennis Sciama Destiny Matrix Dick Bierman Doppler radars E8 group Einstein's curved spacetime gravity Einstein's happiest thought electromagnetism Eli Cartan EMP Nuclear Attack entanglement signals ER=EPR Eric Davis Ernst Mach ET Eternal Chaotic Inflation evaporating black holes Facebook Faster-Than-Light Signals? fictitious force firewall paradox flying saucers FQXi Frank Tipler Frank Wilczek Fred Alan Wolf Free Will G.'t Hooft Garrett Moddel Gary Zukav gauge theory general relativity Geometrodynamics Gerard 't Hooft Giancarlo Ghirardi God Goldstone theorem gravimagnetism gravity Gravity - the movie gravity gradiometers gravity tetrads Gravity Waves Gregory Corso gyroscopes hacking quantum cryptographs Hagen Kleinert Hal Puthoff Hawking radiation Heisenberg Henry Stapp Herbert Gold Higgs boson Higgs field hologram universe Horizon How the Hippies Saved Physics I.J. Good ICBMs Igor Novikov inertial forces inertial navigation Inquisition Internet Iphone Iran Isaac Newton Israel Jack Sarfatti Jacques Vallee James F. Woodward James Woodward JASON Dept of Defense Jeffrey Bub Jesse Ventura Jim Woodward John Archibald Wheeler John Baez John Cramer John S. Bell Ken Peacock Kip Thorne Kornel Lanczos La Boheme Laputa Large Hadron Collider Lenny Susskind Leonard Susskind Levi-Civita connection LHC CERN libel Louis de Broglie Lubos Motl LUX Lynn Picknett M-Theory Mach's Principle Mae Jemison Making Starships and Star Gates Martin Rees Mathematical Mind MATRIX Matter-AntiMatter Asymmetry Max Tegmark Menas Kafatos Michael Persinger Michael Towler microtubules Milky way MIT MOSSAD multiverse NASA Nick Bostrum Nick Herbert Nobel Prize nonlocality Obama organized-stalking Origin of Inertia P. A. M. Dirac P.K.Dick P.W. Anderson Paranormal parapsychology Paul Werbos Perimeter Institute Petraeus Physical Review Letters Physics Today Post-Quantum Physics pre-Big Bang precognition presponse PSI WARS Psychic Repression qualia Quantum Chromodynamics quantum computers quantum entanglement quantum field theory quantum gravity Quantum Information Theory Quantum Theory RAF Spitfires Ray Chiao Red Chinese Remote Viewing retrocausality Reviews of Modern Physics Richard Feynman Richard P. Feynman Rindler effect Robert Anton Wilson Robert Bigelow Roger Penrose rotating black holes Roy Glauber Rupert Sheldrake Russell Targ Ruth Elinor Kastner S-Matrix Sagnac effect Sam Ting Sanford Underground Research Facility Sarfatti Lectures in Physics Scientific American Second Law of Thermodynamics Seth Lloyd signal nonlocality Skinwalker Ranch social networks space drive space-time crystal SPECTRA - UFO COMPUTER spontaneous broken symmetry SRI Remote Viewing Experiments Stanford Physics Stanford Research Institute Star Gate Star Ship Star Trek Q Stargate Starship Stephen Hawking Steven Weinberg stretched membrane string theory strong force gluons Stuart Hameroff superconducting meta-material supersymmetry symmetries telepathy Templeton The Guardian Thought Police time crystal time travel topological computers Topological Computing torsion UFO Unitarity unitary S-Matrix false? Unruh effect Uri Geller VALIS virtual particle Virtual Reality Warp Drive weak force Wheeler-Feynman WIMP WMAP WMD world crystal lattice wormhole Yakir Aharonov Yuri Milner