Relativity 7a - differential geometry I

The mathematical field of Differential Geometry turns out to provide the ideal mathematical framework for General Relativity. Here we look at some of the basic concepts, in particular the idea of a "metric tensor."

Note: To keep these videos "bite sized" I stopped this one before the part where an "appendix video" would be needed. We'll have those for the next vid.

If you are only interested in my physics vids and want to be spared my rantings and wankings I post the physics vids at

http://www.youtube.com/viascience

Category:

Comedy

Tags:

• Einstein
• General
• Relativity
• Differential
• Geometry

[innovaxl]

Oh, Ozmo, I think you would be a good person to ask, have you heard of a man named Nassim Haramein, and his Schwarzschild Proton singularity theory? I wish I was in a position to know if any of his math and theories are mathematically sound. I know some of his ideas he advocates are way way out there, but his universal scaling theory seems really cool. If it's true. Just wondering if you could answer a bit on how sound it all is?

[ozmoroid]

@innovaxl I hadn't heard of him, but I looked him up. I scanned his Schwarzschild Proton paper. I would say his ideas are not sound. As an example, if any sub-atomic particles were blackholes we wouldn't be able to smash them apart in particle colliders, yet we do that regularly.

[Version2PointZero]

Interesting, I just came upon this topic in a totally different field: robotics! Turns out this is very useful for dynamic optimization in robotic arms, if you consider the arm's joints as making a curved coordinate system. I had no idea I already knew the basics required for relativity! Cool stuff.

[ozmoroid]

@Version2PointZero Plus the rotation/spinning stuff is big in quantum mechanics.

[StrikaAmaru]

The only thing I know about Nassim Haramein is that his wiki article got deleted. There are no third party articles for his 'research' to be found anywhere.

On first impressions, he raises all flags of quackery.

[ShinobuHarvester]

...You lost me.

[Jaymaul009]

Dafuq:/

[ocdfreak]

@ImaginaryMdA I was in no way attacking your math competency, I just assumed since your understanding of the mathematical branch of analysis seemed limited you might not be fully aware of just how differentials (which are certainly not an outdated concept) are defined. I'm glad that you have done well for yourself in your mathematics education so far, but you have some misperceptions about the way differentials are defined. It will make more sense to you in future math studies very soon for you.

[rkyeun]

@ozmoroid

If he claims protons are black holes, then yes. Protons and other non-fundamental subatomic particles would not be black holes, and would be able to smash perfectly fine into the smaller components. But the seemingly fundamental particles such as up/charm/electron might be black holes, as they can't be smashed.

The reason to not expect those particles to be black holes is that small black holes are expected to evaporate at an alarming rate, which these particles do not do.

[innovaxl]

Thankyou for the series. I can't wait for the next one. Hopefully it won't be as long a wait from the last video. It looks like the graphs in this one might have taken a bit more time to put together than in the previous videos of the series.

[AchmeZe]

G.I. Jay...

Sorry, I was too compelled to make that lame one.

On more related note, despite math being my weakest subject, I can understand this. Not in the technical details, but I understand how it's formed, what it does and why you'd need it.

I just have no idea how to apply it.

Still... that's math even I'd call 'cool/awesome'.

I want more, I say! :)