Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #377422
| 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 18:26 +0100 |
| Organization | PointedEars Software (PES) |
| Message-ID | <4017562.QSWATVsR6p@PointedEars.de> (permalink) |
| References | (13 earlier) <7287934.XPeLYpz2IV@PointedEars.de> <naum6k$orh$1@gioia.aioe.org> <2313164.RIS2ONplPl@PointedEars.de> <b3f841bc-09c0-4158-9d9e-d96af45bd218@googlegroups.com> <2877801.KmaYAJ1YTX@PointedEars.de> |
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> I think I am following convention here. To recapture, I made the
> following substitutions to arrive and the summantion notation (now
> superscript not following paranthesis meaning the index in a contravariant
> tensor, not an exponent):
>
> ds² = (c)² (dt)² − (dx)² − (dy)² − (dz)²
> = (c)² (dx⁰)² − (dx¹)² − (dx²)² − (dx³)²
> = g₀₀ dx⁰ dx⁰ − g₁₁ dx¹ dx¹ − g₂₂ dx² dx² − g₃₃ dx³ dx³
Sorry, I meant of course:
= g₀₀ dx⁰ dx⁰ + g₁₁ dx¹ dx¹ + g₂₂ dx² dx² + g₃₃ dx³ dx³
> How is “g” going to look like if I “define x0 by ct rather than t”?
>
> There is no “t” there; there is “dt”.
PointedEars
--
Q: Where are offenders sentenced for light crimes?
A: To a prism.
(from: WolframAlpha)
Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll 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