Crown-Horned Snorkack wrote:
> On 17 veebr, 23:19, Erik Max Francis <m...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> George W Harris wrote:
>>> Global conservation of mass/energy requires a
>>> simply connected space-time topology.
>> Actually, it's worse than that; even in a simply-connected spacetime
>> topology, the concept of the total amount of mass, energy, momentum,
>> angular momentum of the Universe is problematic in general relativity.
>> You can talk about one, but those familiar with general relativity know
>> that they're basically cheating.
>>
>> But more im****tantly, global conservation of energy is not in any
>> meaningful sense true in general relativity. Indeed, our models of the
>> Universe require that it be violated (namely, with cosmological
red****ft
>> -- photons traversing an expanding spacetime are losing energy, but the
>> energy isn't going anywhere).
>
> Photons encounter moving matter. Surely changing energy when changing
> frames is a common phenomenon?
With cosmological red****ft, they've already lost the energy by the time
that happens.
--
Erik Max Francis && max@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
&& http://www.alcyone.com/max/
San Jose, CA, USA && 37 18 N 121 57 W && AIM, Y!M erikmaxfrancis
Why can't love be / Like mol***** rain
-- Sandra St. Victor
|
