@ACuriousMind I tried weighting the velocities, but I got the wrong answer (it's the evil webassign platform I'm using). The question itself is vague about it. That's all I know. I have 100 attempts, though, so I guess I can just try as many as needed...
Eh, well, I'd say that's a rather crappy question, then.
user218912
@0celo7 my first year physics prof actually derived lorentz transformations in 1d properly (like in tong's notes) and made the distinction between minkowski space and spacetime.
@JohnDuffield If you have a problem with a moderator use the contact us form to reach out to the stack exchange team. Don't create a mod flag asking for a moderator to be removed because they cracked some joke about elections.
If you do think his message is offensive then use a 10k flag, not a mod flag. IF you're asking for a moderator to be removed, which is what you did, don't use a flag at all but use contact us as I linked there.
@Danu Instead of you filling the nomination comments trying to re-obtain Kyle Kanos' comment, I might as well tell you that his list was: Me, tpg, you, and Jim.
@ACuriousMind I think Webassign is just being anal about significant figures. But anyway, the approach (which was super simple) was correct. Which is good, because it's really basic to me!
@0celo7 No, but for a while I needed some kind of on-line homework system to keep up with my teaching load.
I've also tried ExpertTA, which is cheaper and I suspect will be great when they get the bugs ironed out, but wasn't ready for prime time when I tried it.
@IceLord You can see a conversation between Shog9 and one of those who's nominations were nixed (something that can only be done at the highest level) in the election chat.
What is a proper way for me to describe that? I.e how to show my axioms for a field on one side and it's counterpart for my algebra on a another to demonstrate that my algebra forms a field
If a toroidal equipotential is oriented in the $z$, does movement around the torus ring itself in the "radial" direction correspond to a symmetry/invariance? Is there a symmetry in this equipotential other than rotation around the $z$ axis?
the former example doesn't change the potential because you're moving around the equipotential, but unlike linear transformations it's unclear to me if the lagrangian is being changed by perhaps a total time derivative in this case
At first I had assumed movement along equipotentials would always correspond to an invariance but now I'm not so certain
@GPhys I'm not sure what exactly the issue is. You have a toroidal potential and you're wondering whether it's invariant under rotation around the z-axis?
What is a proper way for me to describe that? I.e how to show my axioms for a field on one side and it's counterpart for my algebra on a another to demonstrate that my algebra forms a field
@ACuriousMind I messed up the transformation some, but it's that transformation but translated so it's around torus (so that the potential is constant)
@ACuriousMind Okay, ignore the scale problems, but if that's the equipotential ^
I was thinking that movement around those circles would be an equipotential, but I think now I realize my idea of a toroidal equipotential is wrong because those aren't perfect circles
that rotation I drew is the transformation I meant to be talking about
@ACuriousMind At any rate, I can generalize my question beyond this example. Let's say there's a potential that's constant along a helix (a helical equipotential) (say, with $z=a\phi$ in cylindrical coordinates). Is $z\rightarrow z+a\epsilon$, $\phi\rightarrow \phi+\epsilon$ a transformation that corresponds to a symmetry?
