On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 09:13:34PM -0700, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thursday, April 18, 2019 at 9:20:36 PM UTC-6, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>     On Thursday, April 18, 2019 at 8:08:58 PM UTC-6, agrays...@gmail.com 
> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>         On Thursday, April 18, 2019 at 6:53:33 PM UTC-6, Brent wrote:
> 
>             Sorry, I don't remember what, if anything, I intended to text.
> 
>             I'm not expert on how Einstein arrived at his famous field
>             equations.  I know that he insisted on them being tensor equations
>             so that they would have the same form in all coordinate systems. 
>             That may sound like a mathematical technicality, but it is really
>             to ensure that the things in the equation, the tensors, could have
>             a physical interpretation.  He also limited himself to second 
> order
>             differentials, probably as a matter of simplicity.  And he 
> excluded
>             torsion, but I don't know why.  And of course he knew it had to
>             reproduce Newtonian gravity in the weak/slow limit.
> 
>             Brent
> 
> 
>         Here's a link which might help;
> 
>          https://arxiv.org/pdf/1608.05752.pdf
> 
>         AG
> 
> 
>     I'm coming to the view that what I have been seeking these many years -
>     namely, a mathematical derivation of Einstein's field equations, somewhat
>     like a mathematical theorem -- doesn't exist. It's more a case of a set of
>     highly subtle physical intuitions about how the universe functions, which,
>     when cobbled together, result in the field equations. For this reason, 
> most
>     alleged explanations of GR involve, at some point, essentially pulling the
>     field equations out of the proverbial hat.  As with the Principle of
>     Relativity and the Least Action Principle, the latter say applied to
>     asserting geodesic motion for freely falling bodies, they're not provable
>     as "true", but assuming them "false" would be a dead-end for physics and
>     would, as well, make our lives miserable. AG
> 
> 
> One possible exception to the above is the Einstein-Hilbert Principle of Least
> Action, from which, it is alleges, Einstein's field equations can be derived.
> 
>  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein%E2%80%93Hilbert_action
> 
> But what it is, and how it would work, is above my pay grade. Maybe someone
> here can shed some light on this topic. 
> 
> AG

Roy Frieden has a derivation of Einstein's field equations from his
Fisher information principle - sorry its above my pay grade too, so
don't ask me to explain, but it could be related to you Hilbert action
derivation.


@Book{Frieden98,
  author =       {B. Roy Frieden},
  title =        {Physics from Fisher Information: a unification},
  publisher =    {Cambridge UP},
  year =         1998,
  address =      {Cambridge}
}

-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Russell Standish                    Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Senior Research Fellow        hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
Economics, Kingston University         http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to