|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Kevin Wampler schrieb:
> In light of one of your other comments I think I now understand what
> point you're making: we can treat space-time distances in a common set
> of units by treating distances as times via the speed of light. In
> which case I'd agree, and it fact the necessity for this clearly falls
> out of being able to have a single number represent the distance at all.
Yes...
> I still don't see how it's relevant for my initial comment that the
> space and time coordinates are treated differently though, since they
> are most definitely factor into the distance function in different ways.
> Stated another way, swapping the time axis with a space axis is *not*
> in the symmetries of Minkowski spacetime, but swapping any of the space
> axes *is*, and this there's something "different" about the time axis.
> Otherwise why bother saying (3+1)D instead of just 4D?
Well, your original statememt was that "distances are measured
differently in time than in space", not "distances are computed
differently in spacetime than in space", so I took this as talking about
"measuring tapes", not the math to combine space and time components of
distance into spacetime distance.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |