Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #430877
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity |
| Subject | Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered |
| Date | 2017-09-03 11:21 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <f113olF2cvkU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <oo89h9$if4$1@gioia.aioe.org> <1a594d50-0fad-40b0-b99a-10a306b23b9b@googlegroups.com> <oo8he0$ul2$1@gioia.aioe.org> <d129d906-4971-48bc-8a0d-dc2953b9c222@googlegroups.com> <ooe555$1an5$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
On 2/09/2017 9:37 PM, Bídníkùm Laterá wrote:
> JanPB wrote:
>
>>>> No. What YOU wrote is pure gobbledygook. Sorry.
>>>
>>> aHmmm?? At your age you didn't find out that your curvature is nothen
>>> but a geometrical projection, a visual since you insist.
>>
>> Again, meaningless.
>
> Woot?? My friend, you didn't passed the subject, seemingly. The visual is
> the best you can do Physics, then here, in Relativity, specifically the GR
> one. YOU CAN'T DO BETTER THAN the VISUAL, which IS geodesic, a PROJECTION.
> Nobody can. You have much to learn, young man.
>
>> Tidal force is acceleration of nearby particles per unit separation
>> distance.
>
> Wow, I suspect an accl to force confusion already!!
>
>> This acceleration is the second covariant derivative of the particles'
>> separation vector, where the derivative is taken in the direction of the
>> test particle's trajectory (geodesic) as long as the parametrisation of
>> the nearby geodesics satisfies certain orthogonality condition.
>
> Not sure it has to do with "separations". Density yes, but you are
> ignoring the CRYSTAL STRUCTURE, which can be rigid(er), whereas your
> "separation vector" becomes totally obsolete, in fact wrong choice.
>
>> D_T( D_T(U) ) = R_{T,U} T
>> So in GR you can calculate tidal forces by evaluating the Riemann tensor
>> on certain vectors representing the body in question.
>
> These symbols explain no _action at distance_, much less Forces, then it
> doesn't impress anybody. Better luck next time.
>
It's apparent that you have some kind of delusion of superiority, even
though it's also apparent that you actually have next to no
understanding of the subject at hand.
I doubt that it's possible to explain this to you, even in principle,
because your delusion will prevent it.
Sylvia.
Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Bídníkùm Laterá <bila@wehia.ui> - 2017-08-27 09:34 +0000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Bídníkùm Laterá <bila@wehia.ui> - 2017-08-27 09:44 +0000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-08-27 22:09 +1000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Bídníkùm Laterá <bila@wehia.ui> - 2017-08-27 15:20 +0000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-08-28 14:38 +1000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Bídníkùm Laterá <bila@wehia.ui> - 2017-08-28 19:04 +0000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-08-29 14:46 +1000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Bídníkùm Laterá <bila@wehia.ui> - 2017-08-29 09:28 +0000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-08-29 22:07 +1000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Bídníkùm Laterá <bila@wehia.ui> - 2017-08-29 16:36 +0000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-08-30 10:18 +1000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Bídníkùm Laterá <bila@wehia.ui> - 2017-08-31 06:17 +0000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-08-31 17:10 +1000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-08-31 02:11 -0500
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-08-29 15:12 -0700
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Bídníkùm Laterá <bila@wehia.ui> - 2017-08-31 06:15 +0000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-08-31 00:45 -0700
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Bídníkùm Laterá <bila@wehia.ui> - 2017-08-31 08:29 +0000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-09-01 12:29 -0700
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Bídníkùm Laterá <bila@wehia.ui> - 2017-09-02 11:37 +0000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-09-03 11:21 +1000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Bídníkùm Laterá <bila@wehia.ui> - 2017-09-03 10:58 +0000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-09-02 22:08 -0700
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Bídníkùm Laterá <bila@wehia.ui> - 2017-09-03 10:58 +0000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-09-04 05:16 -0700
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Ethel Ocallaghan <unlgclo@awlwaac.ag> - 2017-09-04 22:47 +0000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Ethel Ocallaghan <unlgclo@awlwaac.ag> - 2017-09-03 22:12 +0000
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-09-04 05:18 -0700
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-09-04 05:54 -0700
Re: Tidal Forces - revisited, still unanswered Ethel Ocallaghan <unlgclo@awlwaac.ag> - 2017-09-05 12:19 +0000
csiph-web