View Single Post
Old June 6 2013, 04:45 AM   #92
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Strange Dark Matter Theory

FlyingLemons wrote: View Post
The "dark matter problem" is not a consensus, even in theoretical physics.
It is according to proponents of dark matter theory. But if you're right that reports of a consensus are exaggerated, then I stand properly corrected.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
If I ever did get around to I'd start from the latter -- getting the transformations work in a high curvature -- and then work backwards to the observational evidence to see if the numbers are (or could be made) consistent with it.
In order to do that, you'd have to first to start reinventing what we know about differential geometry in order to get it to work before even starting to think about applications to physics.
I don't think so, actually. My sense is that this would involve one of those horrendously complicated recursive processes like third or fourth derivative calculus (which I fucking HATE doing, by the way). You wouldn't need to treat a curved space as if it was flat, you'd just need a mathematically consistent way to account for that curvature itself. Which is, like, stupefyingly difficult, but hardly impossible.

As an extreme oversimplification: you have a formula to calculate the surface area of a sphere (general relativity) and to calculate the surface area of a cube (special relativity). The basic problem is that there's no elegant way to calculate the surface area of an irregularly shaped object like, say, a rock or an oddly-shaped peanut. Locally-flat spacetime is a mathematical conceit that doesn't actually exist in reality and so special relativity itself is just an approximation (like using the ideal gas model to calculate drag coefficients on a spacecraft; you can get away with it under some circumstances, but not all).

I'm not, IOW, saying it would be simple or formulaic as such. Really, I'm saying that Einstein's relativity is a paradigm that obfuscates the fact that Minkowski spacetime IS applicable to curved (or rather BUMPY) spacetime and we simply lack an efficient way to calculate those spacetimes much the way we lack an efficient way to calculate the surface area of a oddly-shaped peanut.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote