Timeline for Can the vanishing of the Riemann tensor be determined from causal relations?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:39 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://physics.stackexchange.com/ with https://physics.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| May 31, 2013 at 21:46 | answer | added | BebopButUnsteady | timeline score: 1 | |
| May 30, 2013 at 21:39 | history | edited | user12262 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
(v:3.141592 -- again: not to be merely asking mere about Minkowski space.)
|
| May 30, 2013 at 21:32 | history | edited | user12262 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
(v:3.14159 -- inverted case (a) to match case (b); i.e. not to simply ask about minkowski space.)
|
| May 30, 2013 at 20:14 | comment | added | user12262 | p.s. Reading the first comment again I now also notice that I had significantly crippled the suggested "usual trick" in quoting. Sorry, FWIW; I still took occasion to edit part (b) of my question, to be perhaps less easily answered, and perhaps even be addressable by applying the suggested "usual trick" as intended ... | |
| May 30, 2013 at 20:01 | history | edited | user12262 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
(v:3.1415: inverted question part (b) in response to 1st comment. -- minor correction)
|
| May 30, 2013 at 20:01 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ |
edited tags
|
|
| May 30, 2013 at 19:58 | history | edited | user12262 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
(v:3.141: invertet question part (b) in response to 1st comment.)
|
| May 30, 2013 at 19:32 | comment | added | user12262 | ... (2): yes, I tried; case (a) seriously for about a week, until I had an idea how to solve it just a few days ago; while case (b), as presently stated, is sort of trivial once it is clear that I'm asking about Minkowski space (but I'm also interested already quite a while, and unable to quite solve so far, the question of whether the structure of case (b) would then identify "mutual rest" of participants). Finally (3): I failed to realize that this "usual trick" is directly applicable because the answer here (see above) doesn't mention it either. | |
| May 30, 2013 at 19:31 | comment | added | user12262 | @twistor59: "This sounds like a very complicated set of conditions" -- still the simplest I could think of, to expect them being relevant. (The footnote may hint at why I thought so.) "have you tried [...] the usual trick of taking Minkowski space and identifying [...] the causal structure?" -- (1): thanks for pointing out that this "usual trick" applies to both question parts (a) and (b), as presently stated (may I rephrase (b), perhaps? ...) Is the applicable "causal structure of Minkowski space" even spelt out anywhere explicitly enough; even by J.W.Schutz, or A.A.Robb? ... And (2): | |
| May 30, 2013 at 6:26 | comment | added | twistor59 | This sounds like a very complicated set of conditions - have you tried to see if you can satisfy your (a) and (b) counterexamples by doing the usual trick of taking Minkowski space and identifying various points, lines etc to change the causal structure? | |
| May 29, 2013 at 22:19 | history | edited | user12262 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
(v:2.7182818: looking much better already ...)
|
| May 29, 2013 at 22:06 | history | asked | user12262 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |