The h Bar

Jake Rose

15:00

Which is the same as what our general solutiopn is

So it doesnt matter

Whats ansatz?

Semiclassical

Well, not quite.

Jake Rose

And what are the rigorous ways?

Semiclassical

Suppose you wrote your general solution as Ae^(bt+ict)+Be^(bt-ict) with A,B being complex

would that necessarily be real?

Jake Rose

No

Semiclassical

Right.

Jake Rose

15:01

(Sorry if Im being stupid/difficult here)

Semiclassical

So the point is that, at the end of the day, you are not really interested in the full general solution

you're only interested in real-valued signals, which correspond to the subset of general solutions for which A,B are complex conjugate

but you can get that just as well by picking just one of your complex solutions and taking its real part

Anonymous

@JakeRose Check out the textbook by Hirsch-Smale. You'd also find it in any normal ODE textbook like the one by Murray, but Hirsch-Smale's approach is more qualitative.

Anonymous

I could tell you the full method, but I'm in a bit of hurry now :P

Jake Rose

I very likely wont have access to the book until I get back to uni

WOuld it be posible next time you're online if youre free you could give it a go?

Or I can pass you my email and whenevrr you get a free spot you could?

@Semiclassical I think i understand it now

Semiclassical

kk

Jake Rose

15:05

That makes a lot of sense

Thank you!

Semiclassical

np

Jake Rose

So nice to have somebody to talk stuff through

John Rennie

@JakeRose just out of curiousity why did you ask for a Cambridge graduate?

SHM is taught at other universities :-)

Jake Rose

Ive found quite often when trying to talk to somebody about confusions with my lecture notes it takes quite a lot of time to bring them up to speed on what the notation is and such

So its often a bit easier to talk to somebody who has seen it in a fairly similiar way

Other universities will teach it fine (if not better) but the time spent talking about notation can often be a bit consuming

Anonymous

@JakeRose You'll get it on libgen. This is the book

Jake Rose

15:08

Is libgen not the russian one?

Anonymous

Ah, wait. The PDF is freely available online: math.upatras.gr/~bountis/files/def-eq.pdf

Anonymous

There you go

Anonymous

@JakeRose Yes

Jake Rose

Tysm

John Rennie

15:53

Hee hee, I've got two answers on the hot network questions list. Feel those rep points flooding in! :-)

Anonymous

Doesn't getting more rep at 240k+ become boring? :P I guess not

dmckee

> Hee hee, I've got two answers on the hot network questions list. Feel those <s>rep points</s>endorphins flooding in!

Gamification works.

John Rennie

@Blue I just gave away 1,000 rep points as bounties!!

@dmckee oi! :-) One of those answers is a technical one about general relativity! What it's doing on the HNQ is anyone's guess ...

Anonymous

@JohnRennie Oh, nice. Which questions?

John Rennie

Though I have to concede the other answer is rather less technical :-)

5

Q: Blueshift near the Schwarzschild BH horizon

After having worked for a while with the Schwarzschild geometry, I have realized something I hadn't seen before and that I found slightly disturbing. Consider the 4-dimensional Schwarzschild metric: $$ ds^2 = -\left(1- \frac{2M}{r}\right)dt^2 + \left(1- \frac{2M}{r}\right)^{-1}dr^2 + r^2 d\Omega...

Anonymous

16:05

@JohnRennie I don't see a bounty there (?)

John Rennie

@Blue ah you meant which question had the bounties. This one:

106

Q: Does someone falling into a black hole see the end of the universe?

This question was prompted by Can matter really fall through an event horizon?. Notoriously, if you calculate the Schwarzschild coordinate time for anything, matter or light, to reach the event horizon the result is infinite. This implies that the universe ages by an infinite time before someone ...

general-relativity black-holes spacetime observers event-horizon

On Rob Jeffries and Pulsar's answers. They are just frackin' awesome answers and a good example of how amazing this site can be!

Anonymous

@JohnRennie Oh, you showed that few days ago. It indeed has some great answers :)

Tanuj

You know you're really good when the man himself @JohnRennie labels you or your work as "frackin' awesome".

Anonymous

I need to learn GR soon! Feels bad to be not able to understand all those nice answers

John Rennie

@Tanuj :-)

@Blue if I try to teach you GR you'll get only a partial understanding. That's why I've backed away.

If you're serious about it you should do it properly. Get a copy of Carroll maybe. That seems to be a popular starters book.

Anonymous

16:12

Yeah, I understand. I started working on the Differential Geometry part. I developed a somewhat okay understanding of tensors and forms. Waiting for the summer holidays to come up (which would be around 2 and half months long). Learning at least basic Differential Geometry, GR and QC properly is in the bucket list

Slereah

I think one of the worst explained part of GR is observers

Fortunately it's in MTW

somewhere

diobuc eulb

hartshorne is a really hard book right?

Slereah

along with everything else

Anonymous

@JohnRennie Slereah had suggested me Callahan. I read the first few pages and it looks good. Haven't tried Carroll yet. Will try :)

Slereah

Callahan is nice for an undergrad intro

it's fairly detailed on basic differential geometry

John Rennie

16:15

@Blue I'm not familiar with that book. From the blurb it looks good though.

Slereah

and it uses a lot of embedded manifolds as examples, which makes things a bit easier to go down

John Rennie

Understanding that GR is a geometrical theory is the key to GR nirvana.

Slereah

and then you find out it was strings all along

John Rennie

Not everyone who purports to know GR understands this of course - not that I'm going to name names :-)

Slereah

"The Reference Frame Comment Policy

Avoid attempts to silence the discussion; spam and promotion of other pages and products; too frequent misconceptions."

John Rennie

16:21

Boom! Rep limit! Thank you HNQ :-)

Curio

@JohnRennie yes I know what capillary action is, but it seems a contradiction with communicating vessels in that case

John Rennie

@Curio I only skimmed the video but it all looked straightforward to me ...

Curio

Shouldn't all the tubes reach the same high?

John Rennie

@Curio no

Curio

What about here then? goo.gl/images/hjmnHN

John Rennie

16:34

@Curio I guess those tubes are too wide for the capillary effect to make much difference

You have to get down to a mm or so for the effect to be noticable.

Tanuj

@JohnRennie In $y=A\sin(kx-\omega t )$ , what are the velocities of wave and velocity of particle respectively ? $V_{particle}=\omega/k$ , right ?

John Rennie

Didn't we discuss this recently? Or was it someone else?

John Duffield

@JohnRennie : re "Not everyone who purports to know GR understands this of course - not that I'm going to name names ". Sadly some people who purport to understand GR say things which are badly out of kilter with the Einstein digital papers. Sometimes what they say flatly contradicts Einstein, sometimes whilst appealing to his authority. Sometimes what they say is flat out wrong.

Secret

[Random] Thinking about some weird delocalised notion of space for a scifi

John Rennie

Oh, wait a minute, I think that was with Abcd.

Tanuj

16:43

@JohnRennie velocity of wave would be $dy/dt$ ?

ACuriousMind

@EmilioPisanty It appears OP did not recover the ability to post answers.

John Rennie

The wave vector $k$ is $2\pi/\lambda$ and the angular frequency is $\omega = 2\pi f$. The velocity is just $v = \lambda f$.

If $k$ and $\omega$ are constants then the group and phase velocities are the same. For example this is the case for light in a vacuum.

Tanuj

@JohnRennie nice accent ina bacuum

John Rennie

:-)

Tanuj

anyways @JohnRennie so $v=\omega/k$ is particle velocity right ?

John Rennie

16:46

I think that's the phase velocity

The particle velocity is the group velocity.

Tanuj

@JohnRennie what is that ?

John Rennie

Group velocity

The group velocity of a wave is the velocity with which the overall shape of the waves' amplitudes—known as the modulation or envelope of the wave—propagates through space. For example, if a stone is thrown into the middle of a very still pond, a circular pattern of waves with a quiescent center appears in the water, also known as a capillary wave. The expanding ring of waves is the wave group, within which one can discern individual wavelets of differing wavelengths traveling at different speeds. The shorter waves travel faster than the group as a whole, but their amplitudes diminish as th...

Tanuj

@JohnRennie okay there are two velocities , one with which every particle of SHM vibrates and one with which wave moves forward . I'm calling the former as particle velocity

John Rennie

@Tanuj No.

Tanuj

Okay , so it's the latter

John Rennie

16:48

I'm not talking about the lateral velocity, just the velocity in the direction the wave is moving.

Semiclassical

I really need to resist responding to Zee. @ACuriousMind

John Rennie

@Tanuj ah OK, I misunderstood what you mean by particle velocity

Secret

Consider a region of space where it looks visually like a pile of sand (because pockets of spaces are being translocated from their original positions, thus result it to look scrambled despite internally, each bit is connected normally as if it is never scrambled (i.e. the topology is retained). Now passing a cube object through it will give you a swarm like appearance:

Tanuj

@JohnRennie got it , the wave velocity is $v=\omega/k$ , what is the velocity of particle executing SHM ? $dv/dt$ ?

Secret

Anonymous

16:49

@Semiclassical Zee?

Semiclassical

MSE chat room user.

Nothing here.

John Rennie

@Tanuj you mean, for example, if the wave is on a string how fast is a point on the string moving sideways?

Secret

one can then imagine while the cube is within this region, and hence look like a swarm as seen from the outside, a ball then hit the swarm and thus the bits of the cube become scattered despite maintaining connectivity

Anonymous

@Semiclassical Ah. We have our fair share of such users here. :P

Secret

Thus locally at every point of the cube, space looks normal, but seen from the outside, the cube look like a scrambled mess

Tanuj

16:50

@JohnRennie yea , sideways or up and down . Like if we just focus our attention on one particle , it will be in an SHM , right ? I was asking about the velocity of that particle , not the velocity with which the wave propagates.

Rick

Can someone help - physics.stackexchange.com/questions/397651/…

dmckee

@Tanuj We usually use "the wave velocity" when talking about a pure signal. When you combine them you really have to say "group velocity" and "phase velocity".

Secret

For an idea on what I am talking about, refer to this video:

Fractured 4 Walkthrough

►

here, the playfield is scrambled, but the connectivity is not, thus it is like a region of space packed with wormholes in all directions

Tanuj

@dmckee Okay

John Rennie

@Tanuj OK. If $y = A\sin(kx - \omega t)$ then imagine sitting at the point $x=0$ watching the particle moving up and down. It's position is then $y(t) = A\sin(-\omega t)$

Tanuj

16:52

@JohnRennie yea

John Rennie

And the transverse velocity is indeed just $dy/dt = -A\omega\cos(-\omega t)$

dmckee

Now, for non-dispersive wave the group velocity and the wave velocity are the same, but that is a special case.

Tanuj

@JohnRennie okay cool.

Secret

Now, we can go one step further, by having object collisions actually result in the change in the connectivity of each piece. Then if the aforementioned scrambled cube get hit by a rolling ball, it is "shattered" because space is rearranged thus trying to take the cube out of the region and one will found the cube is altered in some way

Tanuj

@JohnRennie when we use $v=\sqrt{\dfrac{T}{\mu}}$ , $v$ is velocity of wave , right ? (The longitudinal wave) , or the velocity of its propagation ?

John Rennie

16:55

Yes

Tanuj

Got it . Thanks.

Semiclassical

@EricSilva this conversation hurts me inside

Eric Silva

Me too me too

ACuriousMind

Then...just drop it?

Anonymous

Doesn't really help to feed the trolls. :)

Semiclassical

17:02

I knoooow.

But ugh, it's just so asinine

Eric Silva

@ACuriousMind Ive tried but the dude honestly constantly belittles people while putting his ignorance on full display and after a while it just becomes hard to deal with I guess

Balarka Sen

@Blue Since when is trolling equivalent to hitting your foot with an axe, pulling your pants down in the public and saying "oops! I pooped myself"?

John Rennie

Were I an owner of that room Zee would be enjoying a break from it ...

Balarka Sen

That's what's Zee monologues are like

Anonymous

@BalarkaSen That's a type of attention seeking aka trolling.

John Rennie

17:06

Have you tried speaking to the room owners?

Anonymous

Just tell one of the mods to suspend them for a day or so

Anonymous

If (s)he is annoying you people

ACuriousMind

@EricSilva 1. I don't really encourage using this room to have a meta conversation about another user/room 2. Since this behaviour is not currently a blatant violation of Be Nice, I hesitate to take action as a non-RO/non-math mod. Have you tried talking to your room owners/mods?

Balarka Sen

I don't think there's anything per se suspension-worthy about that guy

John Rennie

@BalarkaSen if one person is annoying everyone else it's perfectly OK to ask them to stop or leave.

Semiclassical

17:08

For the most part, I agree that "ignore" is probably the right approach

Anonymous

@BalarkaSen Then just put them on ignore. I know it is hard to ignore such people, but it's worth it to save your sanity.

Anonymous

I've recently had a similar experience on the classical channel chat

Balarka Sen

@Blue I am not annoyed by him per se

Semiclassical

the problem with that attitude is that it leaves such people in a position to confuse people who wander in and aren't aware of it

Balarka Sen

I just think it's cringe

Anonymous

17:11

Anyhow, I think the math SE chat lacks active ROs

Eric Silva

I'm just gonna leave him on permanent ignore and be done with it

John Rennie

Anyone can volunteer to be a room owner. If you spend a lot of time in a room and think you could help improve it then ping a mod and ask to be a room owner.

Anonymous

I guess SemiC and Balarka should volunteer

Anonymous

That room seriously needs some

Anonymous

That said, Zee is out for 30 mins at least

Secret

17:19

0

Q: In what sense is a separable potential maximally non-local?

A (rank-one) separable potential is an operator $V$ with the coordinate representation $$ \langle \mathbf r' | V | \mathbf r \rangle = - A u(r) u(r')$$ where $u(r)$ is a real-valued function. It is clear that this is not a local potential as it is not proportional to $\delta(\mathbf r - \mathbf ...

quantum-mechanics scattering locality

Initially I was thinking: What on earth is a gold atom doing in there

Balarka Sen

@Blue I pass to SemiC and declare myself an overlord of the math chat without any direct responsibilities

John Rennie

My question about whether someone falling into a black hole sees the end of the universe has some wonderful answers that show a deep understanding of the mathematics involved and give a rigorous treatment that any competent physicist could follow without too much pain.

Balarka Sen

Also can I take a moment to say this is so fucking great

Year of No Light - Perséphone

►

John Rennie

And then there's this answer

Balarka Sen

John Duffield best answer

John Rennie

17:22

I shall comment no further.

Anonymous

lololol

John Rennie

Except to say that unlike Rob and Pulsar's answers I won't be awarding it a bounty.

Balarka Sen

All of your questions are trivia that are addressed in the margins of Einstein's digital papers

learn to READ PLEBIANS

Anonymous

@BalarkaSen SemiC is too sweet. You need someone mean ;)

John Duffield

@JohnRennie : I have answered your old black hole question. Note the Einstein quote, and remember what you said in this answer.

@JohnRennie : re "I shall comment no further". You should however think it through.

Slereah

17:27

You can spot a Duffield answer because it always starts with a quote of the post to which he replies "no"

Anonymous

@Slereah :'D

John Duffield

@Slereah : Sometimes I like to answer each element of the a question step by step, with a definitive reply.

OK time for tea. But remember this: sometimes for a "wonderful" answer to be right, Einstein has to be wrong.

bolbteppa

@JohnDuffield when you get back, what is your opinion of the Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector?

Laplace–Runge–Lenz vector

In classical mechanics, the Laplace–Runge–Lenz vector (or simply the LRL vector) is a vector used chiefly to describe the shape and orientation of the orbit of one astronomical body around another, such as a planet revolving around a star. For two bodies interacting by Newtonian gravity, the LRL vector is a constant of motion, meaning that it is the same no matter where it is calculated on the orbit; equivalently, the LRL vector is said to be conserved. More generally, the LRL vector is conserved in all problems in which two bodies interact by a central force that varies as the inverse square of...

I used to hate this thing, until like yesterday

Anonymous

@JohnDuffield I don't understand what you try to achieve by posting non-mainstream answers, and trying to teach random people on the Internet your theories and conclusions. If you really feel they're good enough just publish them in real journals, so the the whole wide world benefits from your knowledge. Otherwise, they will just get buried under the debris on the Internet in due course of time and your contributions to physics will go unrecognized.

bolbteppa

Ah but you're forgetting the big conspiracy, Lagrangian's are a lie used to convince you not to feel shame at night, but there is a secret reality purposely being stymied by big Lagrangian

Or so I've heard...

There is place welcoming alternative theories, vixra.org/ e.g. these vixra.org/author/william_o_straub are okay but then you get the craziness e.g. here vixra.org/qgst

One gets to feel important, feel they published, feel they are engaging like those in the 1800's did, and still let everyone else know to safely ignore as well

Semiclassical

17:41

@bolbteppa main place I know about LRL vector is that it can be used to explain the otherwise accidental degeneracy of the hydrogen atom

Though I don't think I've ever sat down and worked through the details of that.

bolbteppa

Yeah I kind of am in the middle of that (going on for about 3 years now :\ )

Semiclassical

lol

I know a math prof on campus who says that's the wrong way to understand that degeneracy though

bolbteppa

Yesterday I finally seen where it comes from, separation of variables in parabolic coordinates, you get the beast from nothing!

Semiclassical

lemme find it

bolbteppa

There's a few things going on, that whole Bertrand closed orbits thing, as well as action angle variables theory leading the energy to depend on two action angle variables apparently explaining the degeneracy, somehow linked to the closed orbits thing, a big mess right now

Semiclassical

17:46

yeah, here's the long paper where he writes about it: arxiv.org/pdf/1309.2694.pdf

bolbteppa

@JohnDuffield I think you're missing out on all the vixra fun, you can publish your own theories there, read other authors attempts at explaining all of physics without math, just words, and then write counterveiling correspondences published on there disputing their theories, like Newton etc did in the 1600's, so you get that feeling, and can convert followers sympathetic to your theories

Cows

Will resume thinking about scattering in QED today, then return to math related stuff later. I have some time now that I have completed a trivial Django project and an even more trivial android app thingy hehe

bolbteppa

The wiki talks about superintegrability of LRL like this paper does, that's another level for me right now heh

Cows

Btw, in case anyone ever wanted to know what I sound like, here you go

tahkevin Live Stream

►

hehe

bolbteppa

@Cows did you get Compton scattering?

Semiclassical

17:49

oh nice

Balarka Sen

you know it's nick Compton and his collars stay scattered

Cows

@bolbteppa yeah, I will be working on Compton scattering today. I had read it , but I am going to try to sit down and do it book closed today.

I will be very proud of myself once I do it

bolbteppa

@Cows it's a mountain to climb to get to Compton scattering from nothing in QFT tbh, a whole course worth of work really

If you really got it that's awesome

Cows

Yes, I will be making a video of me doing in using QFT

bolbteppa

I really wish I had read Relativistic Quantum Mechanics before QFT, life would have been immensely easier

Cows

17:53

yes one starts by using einsteins relations and the resolving schrodingers eq, and gets dirac et all methodology

it's hard to type fast enough, but i get what you are saying

bolbteppa

Cool

Cows

yes, i love qft

bolbteppa

@Semiclassical any idea where in that paper, or what he was getting at, by saying it's the wrong way to think about degeneracy? (It's alright if not, just curious)

That St$\"{a}$ckel stuff is really cool, really hard to make sense of

(a with dots over it)

Semiclassical

not finding it right now myself. maybe I'm remembering what he said wrong

see also this talk: ima.umn.edu/~miller/Penn_State_talk.pdf

bolbteppa

Then there's the whole SO(4) aspect of this stuff, another mountain

I vaguely think the more fundamental thing is that the problem is separable in more than one coordinate system, which is why you get the LRL vector, by using one coordinate system as your coordinates, and using an invariant coming from the separation constant in the other coordinate system, you get the LRL vector. I think this itself maybe more fundamentally due to action angle variables being constrained. Maybe this is all a consequence though

Semiclassical

18:02

well, I suspect the statement from Miller would be that the problem is not merely integrable but superintegrable

but I don't know what exactly that implies, so that's a slogan not a statement

do check out pages 28-29 though

bolbteppa

The reason I mention it is because the whole separability thing is linked to that St$\ddot{a}$ckel stuff he's going on about, I think you use this St$\ddot{a}$ckel stuff to prove the problem is separable in some coordinate system, let alone more than one system

But idk about the super-ness

Semiclassical

yeah

bolbteppa

Landau says "The specific property of the Coulomb and oscillator fields in quantum mechanics (presence of accidental degeneracy) is in correspondence with the fact that in classical mechanics closed particle trajectories exist in these (and only these) fields", so idk which turtle is most fundamental yet

Slereah

the biggest turtle

Riddle me this : is the Moebius strip spacetime obtained by twisting and identifying two spacelike hypersurfaces a FRW universe?

On one hand, it is foliated by homogeneous and isotropic Cauchy surfaces

on the other hand, I don't think there's a spacelike Killing vector field for this that spans the entire spacetime

Due to the lack of orientability

I'm fairly sure it qualifies, but that means I'll have to treat the issue more delicately

bolbteppa

18:20

Maybe only if you allow for inflation runs

Slereah

The exact geometry isn't really important here :p

Making a fun little page for my site on the FRW solutions~

Nice for a refresher

I don't remember much cosmology

bolbteppa

18:39

I'm simply unable to watch those Susskind cosmology lectures, I just know it will confuse me more than enlighten me, but they look good

theoreticalminimum.com/courses/cosmology/2013/winter

Jake Rose

Im ngl

Susskind is a fairly boring lecturer and writer to me

I cant bring myself to read or watch hist stuff

Has an air of 'everybody is below me' about him

bolbteppa

His popular black hole book is great tbh

Avantgarde

Anyone here who works with Mathematica?

bolbteppa

You have to have that air to get into the strings club

Jake Rose

I read some of his theoretical minimum books and they just werent for me tbh

True

Why cant everybody be a freeman dyson

Just an old polite man

Avantgarde

18:44

Susskind's black hole information book? It's good.

Dirac was an old, polite man.

More so than Dyson I guess.

John Duffield

@Blue : Re "I don't understand what you try to achieve by posting non-mainstream answers, and trying to teach random people on the Internet your theories and conclusions". They aren't my theories. Note that I refer to Einstein a lot. And the evidence. And I give references. The key word is teach.

@bolbteppa : Re "I think you're missing out on all the vixra fun... convert followers sympathetic to your theories". I'm not fond of vixra, and they aren't my theories. They're Einstein's theories, and Maxwell's, et cetera. I'm here to try and educate you such that you do your own research and think for yourself, and stop believing in popscience trash.

bolbteppa

@JohnDuffield vixra is the perfect place for your theories, they are most certainly not Einstein's, e.g. he believed in quantum mechanics and didn't think the electron was some classical thing like you do

Jake Rose

Im just about to start a biography of driac

Heard a lot of stories about him from my supervisor

Slereah

how many colors do holes have

Jake Rose

(his dad was good friends with him)

Slereah

18:52

there's black holes

white holes

blue holes

red holes

Jake Rose

Specifically about swimming in the river cam a lot..

Slereah

I think I've seen grey holes

bolbteppa

You should go to the fireplace in Cambridge he sat at while writing up the Dirac equation, or something like that

Anonymous

@JohnDuffield Well, I have never seen anyone including myself, agreeing with your interpretations of Einstein's theories. If that's the case, even then it is worth publishing your conclusions if you think they're right. BTW pretty much everywhere on the net (Wiki, PSE, people's blogs) you have created a negative reputation for yourself. Not sure if you're fine with that, and how long you want to continue with this unfruitful endeavor of yours.

bolbteppa

or the chairs Hardy sat at all the time

Touching that furniture gives one powers apparently

Jake Rose

18:54

I wonder if its still around @bolbteppa

Im back in a couple of weeks so I'll have to have a good look for it

John Duffield

@bolbteppa : I've read the Einstein digital papers, and more. I know what Einstein believed. And that one thing he didn't believe was that elephants could go to the end of time and back, and be in two places at once. See Susskind's the elephant and the event horizon.

Jake Rose

@Blue I dont know anything of the theories or their interpretations that he may have been posting. But is it not more correct to put your views out their and allow them to be scrutinised, than to scrutinise them based on the fact nobody else agrees with them?

Semiclassical

Well, I'm prepared to admit that the received view of Einstein is a caricature of the real Einstein.

Jake Rose

Just putting an opinion out there

John Duffield

@Blue : re "Well, I have never seen anyone including myself, agreeing with your interpretations of Einstein's theories". People do. You don't even agree with the mass deficit.

Semiclassical

18:57

The history is a lot more complicated than what people tend to actually remember.

Jake Rose

Can somebody do me a favour

If they have a scientific calculator about

I left mine at home

And need a quick number put in

Semiclassical

What I'm not prepared to agree on is that said historical questions are decisive. They tell us what Einstein thought; that is not the same as what we 'should' necessarily think.

John Duffield

@Semiclassical : there are some massive differences between what Einstein said and what some modern physicists say.

The evidence is what's important.

Semiclassical

And?

Anonymous

@JohnDuffield Well, good luck with whatever you're trying to achieve, then. And yes, I do not agree with "electron's mass increases when you lift it up". Let's end it there.

Jake Rose

18:59

$\sqrt{0.03*10^(-21)}$

Anonymous

By the way, as of now, I think I only found vzn agreeing with your
conclusions.

Jake Rose

Would be greatl appreciated if somebody could tell me what that equals to like 3sf

John Duffield

@Blue : again, they aren't my theories.

bolbteppa

@JohnDuffield Skipping all the equations means you'll completely misunderstand the points Einstein was making in all those papers, and Susskind is talking about Hawking radiation, something Einstein didn't know about, so why compare Susskind's statement to Einstein... Vixra is the place things for things like this to be nurtured

John Duffield

@Semiclassical : And everything you think you know about black hole physics is wrong.

Transcript for