Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #377431

Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution

From Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de>
Newsgroups sci.physics.relativity
Subject Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution
Date 2016-02-28 19:12 +0100
Organization PointedEars Software (PES)
Message-ID <13247231.nu0iXRpndd@PointedEars.de> (permalink)
References (14 earlier) <f76b3802-4a63-4f66-9a31-61ab16e6108f@googlegroups.com> <1740878.fPiELa9ZGT@PointedEars.de> <2ea85b61-671c-4f34-9d38-625a903792e1@googlegroups.com> <4017562.ONkFa4guUv@PointedEars.de> <193af988-6d40-4d66-83d0-17dd80bd562b@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw


David Waite wrote:

> On Sunday, February 28, 2016 at 10:34:03 AM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars'
> Lahn wrote:
>> David Waite wrote:
>> > On Sunday, February 28, 2016 at 10:19:12 AM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars'
>> > Lahn wrote:
>> >> David Waite wrote:
>> >> > Granted use of spherical coordinates for example would necessitate
>> >> > different units for different elements, but for the rectilinear case
>> >> > your posing there and therefor as a standard for simplicity you
>> >> > should just use x0=ct so your example should be
>> >> > 
>> >> >           (1  0   0   0)
>> >> >    g_µν = (0  −1   0   0)
>> >> >           (0   0  −1   0)
>> >> >           (0   0   0  −1)
>> >> 
>> >> That is the signature of Minkowski space(time), not its metric.
>> > 
>> > No, its the full expression for the Minkowski metric tensor, crank.
>> No, I do not think so.
> 
> Yeah, but you're a crank that apparently doesn't know what a rank2
> covariant metric tensor is,

How did you get that idea?

> but calls the Minkowski metric tensor a signature.

What you have posted is _not_ “the full expression for the Minkowski metric 
tensor”, period.

> Anyway the signature is (+,-,-,-).

Or (−,+,+,+), which is another way of saying that

  η_µν = diag(+1,−1,−1,−1)

or

  η_µν = diag(−1,+1,+1,+1).

Guess what diag(…) expands to…

<http://mathworld.wolfram.com/MetricTensor.html> (once again)


PointedEars
-- 
Q: Where are offenders sentenced for light crimes?  
A: To a prism.

(from: WolframAlpha)

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 17:05 -0800
  Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 22:28 -0800
    Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 22:47 -0800
      Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 23:01 -0800
        Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 23:04 -0800
          Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 23:27 -0800
            Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 23:28 -0800
              Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 23:40 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-24 00:21 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-02-24 10:39 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-24 12:59 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-24 13:12 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-24 08:46 -0600
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-02-24 19:54 +0100
            Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-24 01:20 -0800
              Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-24 01:39 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-02-24 11:12 +0100
            Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-24 08:37 -0600
  Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-02-24 07:16 -0800
    Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-24 22:31 -0800
      Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-02-25 06:30 -0800
      Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 09:11 -0800
        Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 16:13 -0800
      Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-25 09:38 -0800
        Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution PC <pc468@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-25 17:44 +0000
          Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-25 09:50 -0800
            Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 11:51 -0600
              Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-25 09:57 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 12:05 -0600
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-25 10:19 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution PC <pc468@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-25 18:13 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-25 10:21 -0800
              Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution PC <pc468@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-25 18:05 +0000
      Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-25 09:48 -0800
      Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Jackpol11@hotmail.com - 2016-02-25 14:06 -0500
        Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 12:35 -0800
          Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution PC <pc468@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-25 21:44 +0000
          Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Jackpol11@hotmail.com - 2016-02-25 17:37 -0500
            Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 15:11 -0800
              Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution PC <pc468@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-26 12:44 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-26 06:57 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution PC <pc468@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-26 14:59 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-26 07:36 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution PC <pc468@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-26 18:45 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-26 07:37 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution PC <pc468@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-26 19:36 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-26 07:50 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution PC <pc468@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-26 18:47 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 11:44 -0800
          Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 15:47 -0800
            Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 16:00 -0800
              Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 16:09 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 18:29 -0600
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 18:43 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-26 23:04 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 14:59 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 16:19 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-27 10:27 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-27 17:55 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-28 12:13 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Emigdio Sophronius <emigg@augustvisitors.org> - 2016-02-28 11:37 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-28 12:56 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 08:03 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-28 18:13 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-28 18:26 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 09:36 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-28 18:50 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 09:54 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-28 20:40 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Emigdio Sophronius <emigg@augustvisitors.org> - 2016-02-28 19:44 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 12:20 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Emigdio Sophronius <emigg@augustvisitors.org> - 2016-02-28 20:58 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 13:02 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 12:31 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-29 22:40 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 10:54 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 07:30 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-28 17:46 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 08:51 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Emigdio Sophronius <emigg@augustvisitors.org> - 2016-02-28 17:01 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 07:34 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-03 15:15 -0600
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-03 19:54 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 08:48 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-28 09:13 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 10:09 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-03-06 10:56 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-28 18:19 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 09:24 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-28 18:34 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 09:44 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-28 19:12 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 10:19 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 11:17 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-01 17:06 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-03-01 17:54 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-01 19:41 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-03-04 01:17 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 17:12 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 17:53 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-03 22:19 -0600
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 21:36 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-10 11:14 -0600
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-10 18:32 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Luigi Durante <luigdu@jaccappo.org> - 2016-03-10 20:22 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 13:02 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Luigi Durante <luigdu@jaccappo.org> - 2016-03-10 21:08 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 13:19 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Luigi Durante <luigdu@jaccappo.org> - 2016-03-10 21:27 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 14:04 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-03-11 13:33 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-10 22:49 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 14:20 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-03-05 05:24 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 21:36 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 22:50 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-03-05 11:24 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-05 20:07 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-03 14:49 -0600
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Helénē Swanhild <helenes@gardenclosure.org> - 2016-03-03 21:40 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-03 18:58 -0600
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 14:04 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 17:46 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-03 22:21 -0600
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 16:42 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-02-26 20:00 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution PC <pc468@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-26 19:03 +0000
  Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-25 19:36 -0800
  Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution alsor@interia.pl - 2016-02-26 09:36 -0800
    Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 11:33 -0800
      Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution alsor@interia.pl - 2016-02-26 12:05 -0800
        Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 12:47 -0800
          Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution alsor@interia.pl - 2016-02-26 14:16 -0800
            Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 15:02 -0800

csiph-web