1,325 reputation
11445
bio website axiomsofchoice.org
location
age 15
visits member for 3 years, 8 months
seen 2 days ago

dr dr dr! im cia he wasnt alone uh you dont get to bring friends theyre not my friends dont worry no charge for them and why would i want them they were trying to grab your prize they work for the mercenary the masketta man bane aye get them on board ill call ittin the flight plan i just filed with the agency lists smee maimen doctor pavelheer button lee juan ovyu first one to talk gets to stay on my aircraft who paid you to grab dr pavel he didnt fly so good who wants to try next tell me about bane why does he wear the mask a lotta loyalty for a hired gun or perhaps he's wondering why someone would shoot a man before throwing him out of a plane at least you can talk who are you it doesnt matter who we are what matters is our plan if i pull that off will you die it would be extremely painful youre a big guy for you was getting caught part of your plan of course dr pavel refused our offer in favor of yours we had to find out what he told you nothing i said nothing well congratulations you got yourself caught sir now whats the next step of your master plan crashing this plane with no survivors no they expect one of us in the wreckage brother have we started the fire yes the fire rises calm down doctor nows not the time for fear that comes later


Jun
29
asked In what subfields and how far can the naive limit $c\rightarrow\infty$ of special relativity be carried?
Jun
29
comment How to prove Galilean invariance?
@Wox: You have to write "at username" if you want people to see your comments. And yes, they are maps, but $ma$ is not the image of $\bar F$. The image is some vector field and the only the axiom says that It's the same. Consider a function with $f(\pi)=2$. Independently of that state the axiom $f(\pi)=y$. Now it follows that $2=y$. It does so because we've chosen the model $f(\pi)=2$, notice however that, viewed from the axiom theory, $f$ is not some fixed function, it's different for every model of different physical situations: One time it's Lorentz force, one time it's a spring force, etc.
Jun
29
comment Why didn't Newton just propose the 2nd Law and leave it at that?
@Geremia: If you want Ron to read your comment you have to write "at username" in your post. Also, I don't think it's good to edit a false assumption out of the question after answers have been given - the people who will come here will be confused about the answers.
Jun
29
comment Is the only diffeomorphism invariant anthropic principle the final anthropic principle?
The first sentence is a bit vacuous. As you are only talking about an approach to a problem, I'm afraid the sentence "We all know the moon is described to be made out of cheese" is an equally valid statement.
Jun
28
accepted If a fundamental theory exibits e.g. a mirror symmetry, in what sense it the underlying geometry real?
Jun
26
comment Has the Higgs really been discovered at CERN?
So as to move the eV-number of the Higgs a little and thereby predict new undiscovered particles to have an argument in financing politics?
Jun
26
comment Has the Higgs really been discovered at CERN?
What sort of interesting ideas could a non-standard Higgs give though? Wouldn't we still have to incorporate the Higgs mechanism, and thereby use everything we also use now?
Jun
25
comment Why didn't Newton just propose the 2nd Law and leave it at that?
@user2617: If you want to answer Ron, add at symbol + username, otherwise he won't get a message. Also, the point is that choosing a force that can be represented as a gradient field of a scalar function $V(q)$ is a loss of generality. E.g. does the Lorentz force or friction always look like that?
Jun
24
comment study quantum mechanics without physics background
@RonMaimon: I was more pointing at the statement "there is never a reason to tell people not to read something unless it is badly written or full of mistakes". Putting this together means every book not written by someone who invented something is badly written and full of mistakes. Of course, if you make it okay to also consider people who redid calculations, then the initial argument can never be checked as criteria.
Jun
23
revised Why didn't Newton just propose the 2nd Law and leave it at that?
added 19 characters in body
Jun
23
revised Why didn't Newton just propose the 2nd Law and leave it at that?
added 19 characters in body
Jun
23
revised Why didn't Newton just propose the 2nd Law and leave it at that?
added 8 characters in body
Jun
23
answered Why didn't Newton just propose the 2nd Law and leave it at that?
Jun
23
comment study quantum mechanics without physics background
@RonMaimon: I was under the impression you only read from people who directly did the things they write about.
Jun
22
comment In what sense is SUSY a spacetime symmetry?
You have fields all over the (conventional) spacetime manifold. If you speak of fermionic coodinates, do you mean the real/complex space of values the fields could take or do the specific field configurations/value under consideration have an influence on the transformation? Could you clearify that point a little? Since there is a $P_{\mu}$ in the formula, it seem to me that after a small transformation, each of the specific field values becomes that, which was the value on a neightboring point before.
Jun
22
comment Is the distinction between the Poincaré group and other internal symmetry groups artificial?
A question: In the sentence "where $\mathcal{M}$ is a manifold the group of whose isometries is $G$" you already imply that $G$ are isometries and hence $\mathcal{M}$ is the standard metric space with everything that comes with it. If you put that in (thats really just the information which $G$-representation you're dealing with), is there anything left to do? I.e. isn't then every other structure really just redundant extra formulation of things that are already there?
Jun
21
comment What are electromagnetic fields made of?
@WIMP: Maybe in the end everyone agrees that physics is just model building and refering to something in reality is a problem merely emerging from language and the observation that we can abstractly compute and thereby predict. I think all these rigid designators refer to constructions of the human mind (and these are not even mind independend).
Jun
20
revised When does the “norm of quasi-eigenvectors” matter in calculations? For which physical results are these even used?
added 378 characters in body
Jun
20
asked When does the “norm of quasi-eigenvectors” matter in calculations? For which physical results are these even used?
Jun
20
comment How much choice did Einstein have in choosing his GR equations?
@Nathaniel: Well yes. I posted the link with the alternative classical theories and there you see some which are metric theories which also have an energy momentum mensor etc. Condition 1 & 2 make them "similar". See this section and e.g. this f(R) gravity equation, which is Einsteins theory if $f$ is the identity, i.e. $F:=f'=1$.