Results 1 to 4 of 4

Math Help - A simple metric explanation

  1. #1
    Forum Admin topsquark's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2006
    From
    Wellsville, NY
    Posts
    10,211
    Thanks
    419
    Awards
    1

    A simple metric explanation

    (This post has the theme to "Mission: Impossible" running in the background.)

    I am currently having an e-conversation with someone who thinks Special Relativity is incorrect. I have no problem discussing this with this person, though I support Special Relativity based on the evidence, however it seems his Math background is a bit lacking.

    The problem is this. I worked out a metric for his theory so I could compare it with the Minkowski metric. I then pointed out to him that his metric is variable and depends on the relative velocity of the reference frame with respect to his aether frame. His response? What's a metric?

    I've apparently spent too much time doing "Physics Math." I can't come up with a simple description for what a metric is. Could someone please give me an explanation of what a metric is that would be understood by someone who (apparently) knows nothing beyond vector addition and intro Calculus?

    Thank you!

    -Dan
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    Global Moderator

    Joined
    Nov 2005
    From
    New York City
    Posts
    10,616
    Thanks
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by topsquark
    Could someone please give me an explanation of what a metric is that would be understood by someone who (apparently) knows nothing beyond vector addition and intro Calculus?
    Given a non-empty set X.
    Such as function such as,
    d:X\times X\to \mathbb{R}^+
    which satisfies.
    d(x,y)\doublearrow x=y
    d(x,y)=d(y,x)
    d(x,y)\leq d(x,z)+d(z,y)
    Underthese condition we have a metric space d on set X denoted by (X,d).
    ---
    The intuitive, concept is to capture the idea of distance for any sets. Cuz,
    1)It is measured in real numbers (positive) like any distance.
    2)Makes no difference which point is first and second.
    3)Triangular inequality for distance.

    I do not see any more basic way to explain it rather than saying its is distance defined for any sets.

    (I hate these type of people that argue with known concepts that they are incorrect and yet themselves never fully studied them!)
    Last edited by ThePerfectHacker; June 27th 2006 at 07:08 AM.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    Grand Panjandrum
    Joined
    Nov 2005
    From
    someplace
    Posts
    14,972
    Thanks
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by ThePerfectHacker
    Given a non-empty set X.
    Such as function such as,
    d:X\times X\to \mathbb{R}^+
    which satisfies.
    d(x,y)\doublearrow x=y
    d(x,y)=d(y,x)
    d(x,y)\leq d(x,z)+d(z,y)
    Underthese condition we have a metric space d on set X denoted by (X,d).
    ---
    The intuitive, concept is to capture the idea of distance for any sets. Cuz,
    1)It is measured in real numbers (positive) like any distance.
    2)Makes no difference which point is first and second.
    3)Triangular inequality for distance.

    I do not see any more basic way to explain it rather than saying its is distance defined for any sets.

    (I hate these type of people that argue with known concepts that they are incorrect and yet themselves never fully studied them!)
    But this does not cover the metric of SR

    RonL
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    Forum Admin topsquark's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2006
    From
    Wellsville, NY
    Posts
    10,211
    Thanks
    419
    Awards
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainBlack
    But this does not cover the metric of SR

    RonL
    You're both right. ThePerfectHacker has explained (in Mathspeak) what a metric is, and CaptainBlack pointed out that the Minkowski metric is indefinite, so we can only construct what I believe is called the "size" of a vector ( \sqrt{|x \cdot x|} ), not a length. (TPH: You described an "inner product" which is a type of metric.)

    And yeah, I don't think he really knows that much about SR. I'm about to give up on this guy. (sigh) I don't want to say anything bad about him as he's put an awful lot of effort into his theory. My problem is he's sort of focussing on the "paradoxes" which I've never really studied. I'm trying to work with him on other applications, but then I start running into the "Math wall." Which, frankly, I can't teach that well over e-mails!

    (If only SR and GR were intuitive, then I could do this easily!)

    Ah well. Enough griping. Back to work!

    -Dan
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. simple explanation about translation vectors
    Posted in the Calculus Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: January 15th 2012, 11:41 PM
  2. Probably a simple explanation
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: April 1st 2010, 01:11 AM
  3. standard metric and discrete metric
    Posted in the Differential Geometry Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: March 24th 2009, 08:25 AM
  4. Replies: 5
    Last Post: April 21st 2008, 08:33 PM
  5. conversion - simple metric unit
    Posted in the Math Topics Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: June 13th 2006, 08:24 AM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum