Talk:Spacetime: Difference between revisions
m Signing comment by 108.198.115.76 - "→Figure: " |
No edit summary |
||
Line 61: | Line 61: | ||
"World line" or "worldline" or even "world-line"? shouldn't it be consistent? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/131.111.185.74|131.111.185.74]] ([[User talk:131.111.185.74|talk]]) 15:45, 7 October 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
"World line" or "worldline" or even "world-line"? shouldn't it be consistent? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/131.111.185.74|131.111.185.74]] ([[User talk:131.111.185.74|talk]]) 15:45, 7 October 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
== Wrong way round? == |
|||
"There exists a reference frame such that the two events are observed to occur in the same spatial location, but there is no reference frame in which the two events can occur at the same time." Surely this should be vice versa. |
Revision as of 13:45, 7 December 2011
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Spacetime article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26Auto-archiving period: 7 days |
Mathematics B‑class Top‑priority | ||||||||||
|
Physics: Relativity B‑class Top‑importance | |||||||||||||
|
Time C‑class Top‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Philosophy: Science C‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article may be too technical for most readers to understand.(September 2010) |
Spacetime received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
Archives (Index) |
This page is archived by ClueBot III.
|
Figure
I don't quite understand this. The article makes no mention of these things:
- How can you have 0 dimensions of space or time? If there are 0 dimensions of space, you just have a point universe moving in time; if there are 0 dimensions of time, your universe is necessarily forever static. What's with the "unpredictable (elliptic)"?
- What is "ultrahyperbolic"?
- How exactly is N = 1, T = 2 too simple?
- Why is N = 1, T > 3 unstable?
- Do we have a source that N = 1, T = 3 would have only tachyons?
Lanthanum-138 (talk) 11:47, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- This is not an easy graph to understand. Your questions are answered in the paper written by Max Tegmark. That can be downloaded from that webpage in postscript (.ps) or Adobe (.pdf) format. – Paine Ellsworth ( CLIMAX ) 08:07, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
- Questions 1, 2 and 5 got answered all right there. Still don't understand 3 and 4. Lanthanum-138 (talk) 13:54, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
- Wish I could be more helpful, but frankly, much of this is way over my head and not all that interesting to me. The answers you seek may have something to do with symmetry and/or the fact that anything outside the (n,m) = (3,1) is extremely difficult if not impossible in terms of predictability. For a more in-depth read, you might try Barrow and Tipler's material that's mentioned in the References section. Best to you! – Paine Ellsworth ( CLIMAX ) 01:25, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
- Questions 1, 2 and 5 got answered all right there. Still don't understand 3 and 4. Lanthanum-138 (talk) 13:54, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
- This is not an easy graph to understand. Your questions are answered in the paper written by Max Tegmark. That can be downloaded from that webpage in postscript (.ps) or Adobe (.pdf) format. – Paine Ellsworth ( CLIMAX ) 08:07, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
This graph is stupid--- 3 time and 1 space dimensions is indistinguishable from 1 time and three space dimensions. It should be symmetric about the diagonal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.22.238.161 (talk) 05:58, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
- Not true, time dimensions are monotonic whereas spacial dimensions are non-monotonic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.198.115.76 (talk) 15:28, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
Query
can any one explain theory of relativity to a 15 yr old please???????
- The best place to look would be the article Introduction to special relativity which is written in a more accessible way. --JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 12:06, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
NEW Discovery
Hi. I'm not really an editor on here nor do I know much about physics past high school. I was wondering if this page should be edited to include new information that NASA's released about their Epic Space-Time experiment. Maybe someone could make a new page about it or something? Just an idea. 124.168.140.62 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:37, 13 May 2011 (UTC).
lost paragraph
Some recent vandalism was "repaired" by hand rather than reverting, and this paragraph was lost:
- Philo noted that time is a result of space (universe/world) and that God created space which resulted in time also being created either simultaneously with space or immediately thereafter.<ref>The Works of Philo, Trans. C.D.Yonge, Hendrickson Publishers, 1993, ISBN 0-943575-93-1, On the Creation (26–30), On The Unchangeableness of God (23–32)</ref>
I can't tell for sure whether the omission is accidental or intentional. —Tamfang (talk) 15:57, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
- Perhaps it might happen because Philo only hinted at a possible link between space and time, but had not formulated the whole mature concept of an unified spacetime. Incas did. Raoul NK (talk) 10:02, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Minor question
"World line" or "worldline" or even "world-line"? shouldn't it be consistent? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.185.74 (talk) 15:45, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
Wrong way round?
"There exists a reference frame such that the two events are observed to occur in the same spatial location, but there is no reference frame in which the two events can occur at the same time." Surely this should be vice versa.
- B-Class mathematics articles
- Top-priority mathematics articles
- B-Class physics articles
- Top-importance physics articles
- B-Class physics articles of Top-importance
- B-Class relativity articles
- Relativity articles
- C-Class Time articles
- Top-importance Time articles
- C-Class Philosophy articles
- Mid-importance Philosophy articles
- C-Class philosophy of science articles
- Mid-importance philosophy of science articles
- Philosophy of science task force articles
- Old requests for peer review