Classical Mechanics and Gravity From Newton to Einstein
Jack Sarfatti
Excerpted from Stargate
Version 121913
I am taking the contemporary approach, not the historical one. This is a reconstruction of Newton and Einstein’s ideas using modern insights. It’s not exactly how they would have thought of what they did, but what I write does not contradict any essential battletested truths of their ideas.
Newton’s dynamics of particles is based on Euclidean geometry for space with absolute time the same for all observers no matter how they move. Newton had no idea that the speed of light was finite. In Newton’s theory the speed of light is infinite.
Newton’s first two laws are basically a single law.
Law 1. Forcefree motions of test particles are geodesics independent of the mass and internal constitution of the particle.
A test particle is so small that we can neglect the gravity field it generates.
In Newton’s implicit geometry a geodesic is a straight line in space with a test mass moving at constant speed. There is also a state of absolute rest.
Law 2. A real vector
[i] force
F causes the test particle with velocity vector
V and instantaneous position vector
r to have a curved motion with varying speed that is not geodesic.
Assume the mass m is constant, that is the calculus
[ii] derivative dm/dt = 0.
F = dP/dt = d(mV)/dt = mdV/dt = md^{2}r/dt^{2} = ma
This equation assumes a global inertial frame. A global inertial frame (GIF) is an imaginary cubic lattice of rigid steel rods across the entire universe with a clock at each vertex. All the clocks are synchronized. There are artificial intelligences with each clock that can communicate with each other by light signals. They all have Doppler radars to track the motions of test particles or UFOs. Jim Woodward, in his book Making Starships
[iii], uses a simplistic model of the universe by the late Dennis Sciama that implicitly assumes such a global frame. Of course the equations that Professor Woodward proposes as an engine for spaceships will not work  more on this later.
Now in fact, such structures do not exist. We really only have local frames consisting of a finite network of detectors over a small region of space connected by the internet.
Physics is not mathematics. The crackpots I have dealt with do not understand the difference. Theoretical physics is about what detectors measure. We use mathematical models to do that, but the models have an enormous amount of redundant excess baggage that must be factored out in the sense of equivalence relation classes
[iv] and homomorphisms
[v] preserving essential relevant structure. It’s the same as a compression algorithm
[vi] in computer science. Mathematics is like a highresolution image. However, what we need to do real physics is a much lower resolution compressed image in which certain nonessential features are erased because only some small subset is needed for the measurements of interest.
Finally we have Law 3.
Newton’s third law of motion
[vii] is very limited in its domain of validity and is a specialized case of the more general actionreaction conjecture.
[viii] Newton’s third law assumes only central forces, which act instantly at a distance. Therefore, it’s only good really for contact interactions in his original theory. It can be generalized when fields are added to Newton’s particles. Newton did not really have the concept of extended dynamical fields
[ix] that have a reality equal to localized hard massy marblelike particles. Today we have Noether’s theorem
[x] that relates conservation laws to the symmetries
[xi] of dynamical actions
[xii] of systems of particles and fields in classical physics. Everything becomes fields in quantum physics, where the real particles are excited out of a very complicated vacuum that is a seething frothy quantum foam of virtual particles
[xiii] in an ever turbulent Dirac sea.
[xiv] Newton’s third law corresponds to only two systems forming a closed system. More generally a group of space translation symmetries causes the total linear momentum of closed complex systems of particles and fields to be conserved. Similarly, time translation symmetry causes total angular momentum of closed systems to be conserved and rotational symmetry causes total angular momentum to be conserved. There are also internal symmetries beyond spacetime out of which spring the electromagnetic, weak and strong force fields.
[xv] When we go to Einstein’s 1905 special relativity
[xvi] where space is fused with time into spacetime, then rotations that mix space and time together correspond to the Lorentz boosts
[xvii] causing time dilation, length contraction and the equivalence of mass to energy. We can even go beyond that to Roger Penrose’s twistor
[xviii] conformal group
[xix] that includes uniformly accelerated local frames (LNIFs) with Rindler horizons
[xx] as well as a topological stretching dilation symmetry that is badly broken in our world.
[xxi]
[viii] Einstein, the reality of space, and the actionreaction principle
(Submitted on 20 Jun 2013)
Einstein regarded as one of the triumphs of his 1915 theory of gravity  the general theory of relativity  that it vindicated the actionreaction principle, while Newtonian mechanics as well as his 1905 special theory of relativity supposedly violated it. In this paper we examine why Einstein came to emphasize this position several years after the development of general relativity. Several key considerations are relevant to the story: the connection Einstein originally saw between Mach's analysis of inertia and both the equivalence principle and the principle of general covariance, the waning of Mach's influence owing to de Sitter's 1917 results, and Einstein's detailed correspondence with Moritz Schlick in 1920.
Comments:

To appear in "The Nature of Reality", P. Ghose (ed.), Oxford University Press

Subjects:

History and Philosophy of Physics (physics.histph); General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology (grqc)

Cite as:



