The geometry of spacetime is a clever way of encoding the postulates of relativity theory, so of course spacetime will contain a parameter C. The use of spacetime to describe experience depends on the scope of the validity of the postulates.
Harry On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 1:42 PM, James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com> wrote: > More to the point -- or perhaps I should say, to the bit -- is that it > makes no more sense to talk about speeds greater than light than it does > probabilities greater than 1: > > http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath216/kmath216.htm > > > On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 12:35 PM, D R Lunsford <antimatter3...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> No one will ever take cold fusion seriously if they come here and read >> nonsense about how relativity is wrong. All of these specious arguments >> focus on the constancy of the speed of light. >> >> What is never understood is that C isn't the speed of anything in >> particular. It is a parameter that characterizes the geometry of spacetime, >> which is no longer Euclidean. The structure of this geometry emerges from a >> very simple (group theoretic) analysis. The parameter C emerges out of the >> analysis and is either finite, or not. Experience shows that it is finite. >> The derivation is here, I gave it some years ago and this person has added >> commentary, most of which is helpful. Only simple algebra is required. >> >> That light goes at C is incidental to the existence of a universal >> constant with the dimensions of speed. It does so because the corresponding >> field is massless. The most important point to be grasped is that one does >> not assume C=constant - this comes right out of the symmetry and >> homogeneity analysis. Euclidean geometry is also characterized by a >> constant - however it is imaginary, and corresponds to the "circular points >> at infinity" in projective geometry. >> >> http://membrane.com/sidd/wundrelat.txt >> >> -drl >> >> >> -- >> "Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana." - Marx >> > >
