Special and General Relativity Special and General Relativity Physics Help Forum  2Likes
Sep 1st 2019, 11:41 AM

#1  Forum Admin
Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: On the dance floor, baby!
Posts: 2,804
 X4
There are too many threads to keep track of on this topic and it's making a mess of the boards. I'm going to close them (I'll give it a day or so if someone wants to make a last minute post.) I'm going to ask that we discuss this X4 business here and here alone. I'd also like to ask that we don't "jump around" from one topic to another.
I'm first going to make a comment of my position about this whole thing. The way neila seems to be defining this is that the $\displaystyle \gamma$ "factor" in the Lorentz transformations is generalized to
$\displaystyle \gamma = \dfrac{1}{\sqrt{1  \dfrac{1}{X_4} \dfrac{v^2}{c^2}}}$.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
I don't have any data sets to work with here so I'm going to have to be slightly statistically incorrect. The value of $\displaystyle \gamma$ is around $\displaystyle 1.00 \pm 10^{4}$ and I'm going to butcher that to give a value of $\displaystyle X_4$ as $\displaystyle X_4 = 0.99 \pm 10^{3}$ for v = 0.5c or so. (This is very rough because I had to cobble it together over several sites and use a bad statistical technique.) The point is that $\displaystyle X_4$ is pretty much equal to 1 no matter how bad my technique is.
$\displaystyle X_4$ being that it is a property of spacetime cannot change for any circumstance outside of General Relativity so it cannot be changed to suit individual particles.
I would like to start with this statement recently posted:
In X4 theory, for a perfect neutral basic particle (PNBP), the states of “not anti”, “anti”, “superposition of not anti and anti”/ neutral are all itself (simply as X4 = +*, *, ±*). One idea is that it can oscillate between these three states.

Since $\displaystyle X_4$ has been proven to be so close to 1 how can we talk about a negative value of $\displaystyle X_4$?
Dan
__________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
See the forum rules here.
Last edited by topsquark; Sep 1st 2019 at 11:44 AM.

 
Sep 1st 2019, 02:52 PM

#2  Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2019 Location: cosmos
Posts: 551
 It is so hard to enhance a level for thought of human
"There are too many threads to keep track of on this topic and it's making a mess of the boards." Why mess? It demonstrates X4 is applicable interdiscipline/ in multi fields. If it can only appear in one column, I would have discard it long long ago.
The thought of X4 is originated from projection geometry and it's clear that it will be hard for someone to understand what X4 talking before he learns that subject.
Perhaps I am the first guy to introduce the principle of projection geometry to physics.
The most basic DEFINITION in X4 Theory is :
"At this stage, some ordinary representations (such as “our world”,“homogeneous coordinate”, etc) in previous articles should change.
We use specialized and explicit four dimension spacial method of representation and use capitalized letters to denote physical quantities in four dimensional space.
The equation X i = X4χi (i = 1,2,3) or simplified as X = X4χ means four dimensional space is three dimensional space controlled (or effected) by X4 state. It represents the affiliation of space with regard to matter.
X4 ∈ (∞,…,n,…, 3.222xxx,… 2, 1, 0, +1, + 2,… +3.222xxx, … +n, …∞)
..........."
Then:
If a particle is in a certain X4 state, X4 value is a constant, then:
d X /dt = X4χ/dt
V = X4 v or v = V / X4
V is the four dimension spacial speed and v is three dimension spacial speed.
Put it into the γ "factor" in the Lorentz transformations in traditional SR, we got the 4D space γ "factor". It's in the attached picture for the third time. I don't know why that dragon wrote it that way again and said I "defined" it. The 4D space γ "factor" is not a "definition" but the result of calculation.
"...X4 being that it is a property of spacetime cannot change for any circumstance outside of General Relativity ...". It's strange because it seems that I am talking SR?? X4 element itself represents proportion of space in projection geometry. Why should someone try to prove it equals 1?
"... how can we talk about a negative value of X4?" The value area of X4 in 4D space definition is:
X4 ∈ (∞,…,n,…, 3.222xxx,… 2, 1, 0, +1, + 2,… +3.222xxx, … +n, …∞)
..........
If it's proved hard for guys here to understand the spirit of 4D space, or it's not an appropriate place to talk about it, I will give up my endevour too.
Next, I will make one more post in this X4 topic before it's closed (perhaps the last one) in an appropriate thread.

 
Sep 2nd 2019, 10:31 AM

#3  Forum Admin
Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: On the dance floor, baby!
Posts: 2,804

I don't have time to respond to this for a while. (We are now under a mandatory evacuation order.) But the correction to $\displaystyle X_4$ is noted.
$\displaystyle \gamma = \dfrac{1}{\sqrt{1  \dfrac{1}{X_4^2} \dfrac{v^2}{c^2}}}$
Dan
__________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
See the forum rules here.

 
Sep 2nd 2019, 05:00 PM

#4  Forum Admin
Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: On the dance floor, baby!
Posts: 2,804

(Mandatory evacuation has been lifted so I have a little time right now.)
You have an idea with an extra space dimension whose properties you have never really specified to my mind, anyway. What I am looking for in this thread is the basics: What is your idea/model/theory and how is it applied. I have been doing the SR thing because one of your basic equations seems to be a new definition of the Lorentz factor in SR. If the difference between what you are deriving and Lorentz's factor then I ask that you please show the derivation.
So, to repeat the main focus of this thread I ask you to please write down the basics of your idea and how it applies to Physics, be it SR or otherwise.
Originally Posted by neila9876 The thought of X4 is originated from projection geometry and it's clear that it will be hard for someone to understand what X4 talking before he learns that subject. 
To my mind this makes no sense. Projections form a major part of Physics and always has. Anyone who has studied Mechanics, QM, and Relativity (to name a few) has heard of and/or used projections. What is different between your definition of projective geometry and what is already in the literature?
Originally Posted by neila9876 "At this stage, some ordinary representations (such as “our world”,“homogeneous coordinate”, etc) in previous articles should change.
We use specialized and explicit four dimension spacial method of representation and use capitalized letters to denote physical quantities in four dimensional space.
The equation X i = X4χi (i = 1,2,3) or simplified as X = X4χ means four dimensional space is three dimensional space controlled (or effected) by X4 state. It represents the affiliation of space with regard to matter. 
I am not having much luck with your notation. What does $\displaystyle X ~ i = X4_{X^i}$ mean? i runs from 1 to 3, but your symbol X4 has not been defined? Are we talking about a 4D Euclidean space being projected onto our "usual" 3D Euclidean space?
Originally Posted by neila9876 X4 ∈ (∞,…,n,…, 3.222xxx,… 2, 1, 0, +1, + 2,… +3.222xxx, … +n, …∞)
..........." 
I'm guessing that you are saying that X4 can take on any real value? Then just say that!
Originally Posted by neila9876 If it's proved hard for guys here to understand the spirit of 4D space, or it's not an appropriate place to talk about it, I will give up my endevour too.
Next, I will make one more post in this X4 topic before it's closed (perhaps the last one) in an appropriate thread. 
The appropriate thread is here. Whether you are right about X4 or not this site is founded on helping students understand and learn the Physics in their textbooks/papers... information that they need to know to pass their exams and future jobs and whatnot. X4 is outside of the Standard Model and I don't want any confusion about what is standard and what is speculative.
As I said in another thread, it doesn't matter to me if I like your idea, what matters is what the Universe is doing. If you have evidence that X4 is going to be the new hot topic then great for you! If you don't have that evidence then you need to go back to your drawing board.
I am trying to learn your X4 theory from you so I can understand where you are coming from. The questions I am asking are to give me information to do that. From time to time I may point out problems between X4 and what is experimentally known but that should be something of a challenge for you to use X4 to explain, or expand upon, your ideas.
Dan
__________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
See the forum rules here.

 
Sep 4th 2019, 02:03 AM

#5  Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2019 Location: cosmos
Posts: 551
 Geometry base
Just come back from Shapu village Junan township Shunde city (顺德均安镇沙浦村) where actually is the origin of X4 Theory.
……………..
For GR, theory of manifold, etc, are the geometry base which is the 3D space geometry. You all might be more familiar with GR than me because you all are scholars while I am just a guy who is curious in physics and astronomy.
For X4 Theory, projection geometry is the geometry base which is actually 4D spacial geometry. The space point coordinate (X1, X2, X3, X4) is called homogenous coordinate. It contains four spacial elements: X1, X2, X3, X4. Among them X1, X2, X3, namely x, y, z are length elements or say 3D space while X4 is a special spacial element: proportion. In the attachment is an introductory version of projection geometry. I feel its content is not so explicit and understandable. Of course, the projection geometry which I read in Shapu village in 2017 is a Chinese version. I feel its content is better. I don’t encourage guys to go too far in projection geometry. The key is how to make use of its philosophical thought and mathematical method in physics and cosmology.
“X4 being that it is a property of spacetime cannot change for any circumstance outside of General Relativity”
Again, I feel that dragon is a genius although I don’t understand exactly what he is trying to prove. The geometry base for GR is 3D spacial geometry. According to the most basic definition of X4 Theory X = X4x, 3D space x is just the situation of X4 = 1. 3d space is nicknamed by this semitramp as the “mass space”. Actually, GR talks mass and curvature of 3D space.
“…so it cannot be changed to suit individual particles.”
“I would like to start with this statement recently posted:
In X4 theory, for a perfect neutral basic particle (PNBP), the states of “not anti”, “anti”, “superposition of not anti and anti”/ neutral are all itself (simply as X4 = +*, *, ±*). One idea is that it can oscillate between these three states.
Since X4 has been proven to be so close to 1 how can we talk about a negative value of X4?”
How to match the philosophical thought and mathematical method of projection geometry with the real matter cosmos is the key. How to answer that question of that dragon in his OP needs a vivid analogy.
In Chinese ancient culture, dragon means man while phoenix means woman (anti man). If we use the number +* to denote man (dragon), we use the number * to denote woman (phoenix).
A.If we use +* + (*) = 0 to denote that dragon, it means that dragon does not exist in cosmos. It’s absolutely wrong.
B.The superposition scheme ±* might be appropriate because dragon and phoenix actually are both that dragon.
C.The scheme of +* might be correct too, because sometimes that dragon shows the profile picture of a dragon opening big mouth.
D.The scheme of * might be correct too, because sometimes that dragon shows the profile picture of a phoenix.
(Time t put aside temporarily for simplicity)

 
Sep 4th 2019, 08:17 AM

#6  Forum Admin
Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: On the dance floor, baby!
Posts: 2,804

Originally Posted by neila9876 Just come back from Shapu village Junan township Shunde city (顺德均安镇沙浦村) where actually is the origin of X4 Theory.
……………..
For GR, theory of manifold, etc, are the geometry base which is the 3D space geometry. You all might be more familiar with GR than me because you all are scholars while I am just a guy who is curious in physics and astronomy.
For X4 Theory, projection geometry is the geometry base which is actually 4D spacial geometry. The space point coordinate (X1, X2, X3, X4) is called homogenous coordinate. It contains four spacial elements: X1, X2, X3, X4. Among them X1, X2, X3, namely x, y, z are length elements or say 3D space while X4 is a special spacial element: proportion. In the attachment is an introductory version of projection geometry. I feel its content is not so explicit and understandable. Of course, the projection geometry which I read in Shapu village in 2017 is a Chinese version. I feel its content is better. I don’t encourage guys to go too far in projection geometry. The key is how to make use of its philosophical thought and mathematical method in physics and cosmology.
“X4 being that it is a property of spacetime cannot change for any circumstance outside of General Relativity”
Again, I feel that dragon is a genius although I don’t understand exactly what he is trying to prove. The geometry base for GR is 3D spacial geometry. According to the most basic definition of X4 Theory X = X4x, 3D space x is just the situation of X4 = 1. 3d space is nicknamed by this semitramp as the “mass space”. Actually, GR talks mass and curvature of 3D space.
“…so it cannot be changed to suit individual particles.”
“I would like to start with this statement recently posted:
In X4 theory, for a perfect neutral basic particle (PNBP), the states of “not anti”, “anti”, “superposition of not anti and anti”/ neutral are all itself (simply as X4 = +*, *, ±*). One idea is that it can oscillate between these three states.
Since X4 has been proven to be so close to 1 how can we talk about a negative value of X4?”
How to match the philosophical thought and mathematical method of projection geometry with the real matter cosmos is the key. How to answer that question of that dragon in his OP needs a vivid analogy.
In Chinese ancient culture, dragon means man while phoenix means woman (anti man). If we use the number +* to denote man (dragon), we use the number * to denote woman (phoenix).
A.If we use +* + (*) = 0 to denote that dragon, it means that dragon does not exist in cosmos. It’s absolutely wrong.
B.The superposition scheme ±* might be appropriate because dragon and phoenix actually are both that dragon.
C.The scheme of +* might be correct too, because sometimes that dragon shows the profile picture of a dragon opening big mouth.
D.The scheme of * might be correct too, because sometimes that dragon shows the profile picture of a phoenix.
(Time t put aside temporarily for simplicity) 
Okay, I pretty much understand what you are talking about when you say "projections." It's pretty standard in Linear Algebra and stuff. So we have an Euclidean 4 space projected onto an Euclidean 3 space, which then we can talk about a spacetime. Physics in general tends to use affine spaces without mentioning it explicitly but projective spaces do enter in if you want to get down and dirty in the Mathematics of it.
As to the GR comment you made GR talks about the metric of spacetime, not just the metric for 3D space. (SR talks about a Euclidean 3 space with an attached time "space" forming a curved spacetime.)
I'll be back later on to address some other comments.
Dan
__________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
See the forum rules here.
Last edited by topsquark; Sep 4th 2019 at 08:53 AM.

 
Sep 4th 2019, 08:48 AM

#7  Forum Admin
Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: On the dance floor, baby!
Posts: 2,804

Originally Posted by neila9876 For GR, theory of manifold, etc, are the geometry base which is the 3D space geometry. You all might be more familiar with GR than me because you all are scholars while I am just a guy who is curious in physics and astronomy.
For X4 Theory, projection geometry is the geometry base which is actually 4D spacial geometry. The space point coordinate (X1, X2, X3, X4) is called homogenous coordinate. It contains four spacial elements: X1, X2, X3, X4. Among them X1, X2, X3, namely x, y, z are length elements or say 3D space while X4 is a special spacial element: proportion. In the attachment is an introductory version of projection geometry. I feel its content is not so explicit and understandable. Of course, the projection geometry which I read in Shapu village in 2017 is a Chinese version. I feel its content is better. I don’t encourage guys to go too far in projection geometry. The key is how to make use of its philosophical thought and mathematical method in physics and cosmology.
“X4 being that it is a property of spacetime cannot change for any circumstance outside of General Relativity”
Again, I feel that dragon is a genius although I don’t understand exactly what he is trying to prove. The geometry base for GR is 3D spacial geometry. According to the most basic definition of X4 Theory X = X4x, 3D space x is just the situation of X4 = 1. 3d space is nicknamed by this semitramp as the “mass space”. Actually, GR talks mass and curvature of 3D space.
“…so it cannot be changed to suit individual particles.”
“I would like to start with this statement recently posted:
In X4 theory, for a perfect neutral basic particle (PNBP), the states of “not anti”, “anti”, “superposition of not anti and anti”/ neutral are all itself (simply as X4 = +*, *, ±*). One idea is that it can oscillate between these three states.
Since X4 has been proven to be so close to 1 how can we talk about a negative value of X4?”
How to match the philosophical thought and mathematical method of projection geometry with the real matter cosmos is the key. How to answer that question of that dragon in his OP needs a vivid analogy.
In Chinese ancient culture, dragon means man while phoenix means woman (anti man). If we use the number +* to denote man (dragon), we use the number * to denote woman (phoenix).
A.If we use +* + (*) = 0 to denote that dragon, it means that dragon does not exist in cosmos. It’s absolutely wrong.
B.The superposition scheme ±* might be appropriate because dragon and phoenix actually are both that dragon.
C.The scheme of +* might be correct too, because sometimes that dragon shows the profile picture of a dragon opening big mouth.
D.The scheme of * might be correct too, because sometimes that dragon shows the profile picture of a phoenix.
(Time t put aside temporarily for simplicity) 
$\displaystyle X4_X$, if I am correct, is simply saying that you have a variable "X" (in your notation representing a value of x in 3D space that is projected from an X4 space. You mentioned a convention where the capital letters represent a quantity in your 4 space. Why not just keep it that way and write it simply as X and if you need something more specific then call it $\displaystyle X4_i$ where i could be any index from to 1 to 4. Then the component $\displaystyle X4_i$ would simply be $\displaystyle X_i$.
Are those the basics by which we can start talking about the Physics? How do you use this to solve a problem?
Dan
__________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
See the forum rules here.
Last edited by topsquark; Sep 4th 2019 at 08:54 AM.

 
Sep 4th 2019, 07:02 PM

#8  Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2019 Location: cosmos
Posts: 551
 some replies first
That dragon talks so much and askes so much questions...I even have to consult my dictionary to find out what some English words mean. And of course I have to think how to write, in English...
" ...But the correction to X4 is noted."
Yes, that dragon added a square mark on the head of X4. Another correction should be "v". It should be a capitalized letter "V". It means 4D space velocity.
"... this site is founded on helping students understand and learn the Physics in their textbooks/papers..."
I don't encourage students in school to research X4. It's for guys who are curious in physics and astronomy.
"Originally Posted by neila9876 View Post
X4 ∈ (∞,…,n,…, 3.222xxx,… 2, 1, 0, +1, + 2,… +3.222xxx, … +n, …∞)
..........."
I'm guessing that you are saying that X4 can take on any real value? Then just say that!"
Yes, you guess right. In projection geometry, X4 ∈ R. But pay attention please, there is a very special number: ∞. I wrote it that way to highlight the characteristics of those values/numbers. In philosophy, the value area of (∞,…,n,…, 3.222xxx,… 2, 1, 0, +1, + 2,… +3.222xxx, … +n, …∞) reflects zero point, contrary, similar, certain and uncertain, infinite, with border.
"X4 is outside of the Standard Model and I don't want any confusion about what is standard and what is speculative."
Yes. X4 is "eccentric" hole. I call it the duck model: from tiny particle to the border of cosmos, from proton to neutrino, from SR to QM, from eletric charge to magnetic, from the Earth to the Sun, from anti matter to dark matter,etc, just one model...
..........
Next post, wait some time...

 
Sep 6th 2019, 09:56 AM

#9  Forum Admin
Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: On the dance floor, baby!
Posts: 2,804

Originally Posted by neila9876 That dragon talks so much and askes so much questions...I even have to consult my dictionary to find out what some English words mean. And of course I have to think how to write, in English...
" ...But the correction to X4 is noted."
Yes, that dragon added a square mark on the head of X4. Another correction should be "v". It should be a capitalized letter "V". It means 4D space velocity.
"... this site is founded on helping students understand and learn the Physics in their textbooks/papers..."
I don't encourage students in school to research X4. It's for guys who are curious in physics and astronomy.
"Originally Posted by neila9876 View Post
X4 ∈ (∞,…,n,…, 3.222xxx,… 2, 1, 0, +1, + 2,… +3.222xxx, … +n, …∞)
..........."
I'm guessing that you are saying that X4 can take on any real value? Then just say that!"
Yes, you guess right. In projection geometry, X4 ∈ R. But pay attention please, there is a very special number: ∞. I wrote it that way to highlight the characteristics of those values/numbers. In philosophy, the value area of (∞,…,n,…, 3.222xxx,… 2, 1, 0, +1, + 2,… +3.222xxx, … +n, …∞) reflects zero point, contrary, similar, certain and uncertain, infinite, with border.
"X4 is outside of the Standard Model and I don't want any confusion about what is standard and what is speculative."
Yes. X4 is "eccentric" hole. I call it the duck model: from tiny particle to the border of cosmos, from proton to neutrino, from SR to QM, from eletric charge to magnetic, from the Earth to the Sun, from anti matter to dark matter,etc, just one model...
..........
Next post, wait some time... 
I'll wait, but just one quick comment. $\displaystyle \infty$ is not a number!
Dan
__________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
See the forum rules here.

 
Sep 6th 2019, 10:45 AM

#10  Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2019 Location: cosmos
Posts: 551
 ∞
The Chinese version of projection geometry defined ∞ is an additonal "new" number.
See the attached picture.
This semitramp defines 江门地方黑恶势力钟永康集团/九一四牛顿定律first order in cosmos?
Last edited by neila9876; Sep 10th 2019 at 10:57 PM.
Reason: detailed

  Thread Tools   Display Modes  Linear Mode  