On 8/17/2011 9:01 AM, John Mikes wrote:
Brent wrote about my questioning 'energy':

*/"Hmm. It's the 00 component of the stress-energy tensor. It's the Hamiltonian, the time evolution operator. It's not a thing/*."

Brent, you may know better than that:
1. I did not restrict my inquiry to 'things' (is e.g. a 'refutation' a thing? but you _can_ identify it)

You explicitly asked," is it a thing".  So I answered.


2. The ID for 'energy' is misplaced if you refer to it as a component of a /'kind''/ of it

??


3. a Hamiltonian is part of the physical world figment. In my 'agnostic' inquiry I want to eliminate the restrictions to human conclusions as explanation. Can you arrive at a so called 'Hamiltonian' by considerations without applying any relation to references including the 'idea' of energy? in which case it falls again into an idem per idem.

Sure. If you find a time evolution operator that accurately predicts the evolution of a closed system, then it turns out that it implies a conserved quantity - which is what we call the energy.


4. I am not sure if "time" is primary to 'energy, or vice versa, but both fall under point #3.

They are conjugate variables. Time symmetry <=> energy conservation by Noether's theorem.

Brent


I tried to outline something (in my own /*_narrative_*/ about the 'story' - history? of _some(?) _ Multiverse which might lead to descriptions in physical thinking "close" to energy: that is the formation of the timeless complexity we call a* 'universe'* - from the complete symmetry of (my) proto-world "Plenitude" by inevitable reasons, which respites as it forms - yet *FROM THE INSIDE* shows for 'us' a vast time-space system (*_in_* *OUR* universe) which is explained for human understanding(?) by the terms of a physical world. The trend of the re-dissipation is a draw on the complexity realized - again from the inside - as a power to equalize, dissipate, eliminate 'complex knots' all the way from a hypothetical Big Bang to a similarly hypothetical Big Crunch of redistribution. All in a timeless instant as seen from the Plenitude. (Mind you: I set up the Plenitude as beyond the limitations of our insight and it's symmetry beyond the limitations we have for the term. The inevitability of 'universes' formation comes from the postulate that within the Plenitude everything is in 'transition' with everything else - consequently it is inevitable that 'related' aspects "ball together" occasionally (into a complexity?) violating the total symmetry). This 'narrative' has no "scientific" claims and is not ready for discussion.

John





On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 7:26 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:

    On 8/16/2011 9:27 AM, John Mikes wrote:
    Stathis,

    do you have a reasonable opinion about whatever you (and
    physicists?) call: */_"energy"_/*?
    (Not how to measure it, not what it does, not the result of 'it',
    or quantitative relations, or  kinds you differentiate, but 'is
    it a thing'? where it comes from and how? i.e. an i*dentification
    of the term*, I mean).

    Hmm.  It's the 00 component of the stress-energy tensor.  It's the
    Hamiltonian, the time evolution operator.  It's not a thing.

    Brent


    I could not get a reasonable reply from physicists so far upon
    many such questions. All 'cop-out' on paraphernalia I want to
    exclude.
    (You remember: I have a Ph.D. chem-phys-math and 50 yrs in
    polymer engineering).
    Friendly:
    John Mikes


-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
    Groups "Everything List" group.
    To post to this group, send email to
    everything-list@googlegroups.com
    <mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>.
    To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
    everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
    <mailto:everything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
    For more options, visit this group at
    http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to