In my (ml's) previous contribution I tried (88) to


EXCUSE
MY LONG
EXCURSION INTO THE
PHYSICS OF TIME AS SHAPED
BY A PAIR OF RELATED IMPULSES ~
first, an un controllable desire, common among teachers,
to propagate the insights drawn from years of study and share the excitement that understanding can generate,
and second, an "IRRESISTible anxiety" that if I do not describe my ideas in sufficient detail, they will be misunderstood.

Superficially, this secondary anxiety appears only to sharpen the primary narcissism, without which teachers would be unable to push ideas & interpretations for a living, but my concern here is not to label any variation on my understanding of physics as wrong. Although I had not fully articulated my concerns to myself while writing, my discussion of time was influenced by a desire to avoid three specific misreadings.

My first concern was to approach the subject in a way that would be recognizable by working physicists, not only because translating the language of physics and mathematics into English prose is always difficult, but specially because the topic is outside the mainstream of physics education. Although the parameter I call historical time appears in equations familiar to second or third year physics students, little attention is generally paid to its underlying significance or it's wider possibilities; most presentations of electromagnetism, gravitation, cosmology, and elementary particle theory problematically lump the historical time (string theory has two such objects) together with a different quantity known as proper time. Fearing that an abbreviated discussion. Would leave too few points of connection for physicists, and with no small fear of being branded a heretic, I found myself impelled to inflation.
14 mrt 2013 - bewerkt op 17 mrt 2013 - meld ongepast verhaal
Weet je zeker dat je dit verhaal wilt rapporteren? Ja | Nee
Profielfoto van Asih
Asih, man, 81 jaar
   
Log in om een reactie te plaatsen.   vorige volgende