Posted on 06/01/2015 12:19:56 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
John Forbes Nash Jr. was a mathematical genius who had his life chronicled in the movie A Beautiful Mind. One of Nash’s colleagues says that just days before he died in a New York taxi cab accident, he had discussed his latest and possibly most brilliant discovery to date. Mathematician Cédric Villan says that Nash told him that he had replaced Einstein’s Theory of Relativity and that the new equation would further explain quantum gravity.
The Daily Mail reports that on May 20, 2015, just three days before the tax cab accident that would take his life, Nash spoke to his friend and fellow mathematician Cédric Villan in Norway. Villan says that Nash was excited about a new discovery which he said would replace Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. Though specific details on the equation were not given, Villan says that Nash’s equation would further explain quantum gravity in a way that Einstein’s did not.
Sadly, Nash would pass away on his journey back home from Norway after speaking to Villan. It was noted that Nash had just left the airport and was taking the taxi back to his home when the fatal taxi cab accident occurred. Both John Nash and his wife would pass away in the accident. Now Villan says he will be “looking into” Nash’s claims that he had found a replacement to the Theory of Relativity.
“I will certainly look into it. He explained it to me. He thought he had discovered a replacement for the equation.”
In addition to promising to look into the works left behind by Nash, Villan also took a moment to praise Nash for his contributions to the mathematics community and that he was honored to be the chairman at a lecture given by Nash.
“He qualifies as a genius. I had the honor of being the chairman at a lecture he was giving. He told about the equation he had tried to devise in his study of general relativity. He was summarizing the problem with difficult equations. It was amazing.”
The world may be mourning the loss of “a beautiful mind,” but the contributions to the scientific community may not be over for Nash. If Cédric Villan has his way, we may also be able to uncover the last gift Nash left by piecing together his final work. Do you think that Nash’s equation could replace Einstein’s Theory of Relativity?
also is the pesky fact that the speed of light has been shown to vary ... too complex for my thought processes and am going to have to sleep on the graph ... At least the graph has some flat surfaces ...
maybe it is as simple as understanding Buzz Light Year ... To Infinity and Beyond
The mathematical relationship between the two paths is simply based on the Pythagorean Theorem for right-triangles that many of us used in high school.
Here is that mathematical relationship (between time as perceived by the two different observers) that is derived from the familiar Pythagorean Theorem (a squared + b squared = c squared, c being the longest leg of the 90 degree (right) triangle depicted in the above illustration):
where delta t' = the time in one frame of reference, and delta t = the time in the other. v = the rate of relative motion between the two, c = the speed of light
one problem ... space does not always allow for right triangles instead space/time, according to Einstein, warps or curves based upon perceived orbits observed and unknown orbits unobserved yet perceived? And the search for the point of universe origin is perceive as a single point in time/space ... ?
Light itself does vary its speed through different materials, but the 'speed of light' is also the universal speed limit to which events can propagate. ie, light itself can at times move slower than the speed of light.
am asking too many questions ... One final question and will leave for the evening/morning ... Is the equation contest still ongoing or have the set of equations posed been solved, money paid, and new set of equations posed?
That perceived "curvature" is merely a series of linear (straight line) events as depicted in the graphic--a series of linear events stacked onto one another. Curved space falls under General Relativity. GE deals with ACCELERATED rates of relative motion (in addition to uniform/constant rates of relative motion, as described by Special Relativity). The graphic depicts a state of constant motion between two observers (v), and thus would fall under Special Relativity. GE is therefore the more complete of the two theories.
In other words, if the rate of relative motion ("v") as depicted in this graphic was less than depicted, the angle of the line would be closer to vertical than in the graphic. If the rate were greater, it would be closer to horizontal, the extreme (but impossible) case being v=c, where the light pulse would NEVER reach the opposite end of the apparatus. Of course if v=c, time would be precisely the same for both observers, as there would be no relative motion between them. They would be "at rest" with respect to each other.
The dictum of math teachers from first grade onward: “Show your work.”
ie, if rate of relative motion was changing (accelerated relative motion as described in GR) the angle of the line would constantly change resulting in a ‘curved’ line, as opposed to a straight one as depicted in the graphic.
GE in my previous posts should have been GR.
and perception is ‘v’ can only equal ‘c’ during a nuclear explosion ... so to attain ‘t’ constant ... ‘v’ would equal ‘c’
I KNEW the Pope was involved somehow.
The way Calvin's dad explained it, the reason time goes slower at great speed is "because you keep changing time zones. See, if you fly to California, you gain three hours on a five hour flight, right? So if you go at the speed of light, you gain MORE time, because it doesn't take as long to get there. Of course, the theory of relativity only works if you're going west."
http://www.s-anand.net/blog/calvin-and-hobbes-dad-explains-science/
This seems pretty simple to me, not hard to understand at all.
Where did you read or hear that? It is impossible for v to equal c. Theory states it would require an infinite amount of energy to accelerate something to c, the speed of light. Energy is not infinite in the universe. As things accelerate towards light speed their mass increases more and more, to the point where it would get harder and harder to accelerate them. As the acceleration moves the object close to light speed, its mass would grow towards infinity. In the impossible case of v=c, the mass would be infinite.
Absolutely! I have no idea what you just said, but it sounds right!
Nope ... am wrong ... bet on it!
You can't travel through something that isn't there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.