Mach’s principle & spacetime (contd.)

0:00 We are in a spiral now, but if the lost energy does not disappear its trace, it will be converted into radiation, but it is the principle of conservation that has prevented its disappearance. The management of the gravitational waves will therefore not be at the mercy of the doubts that entail conservation. If the lost energy is not necessarily recovered into radiation, why take double freedom seriously? These two degrees of freedom, as I said, which separate inertial matter, could not be a gauge, as I said, purely decorative, derived from reality, from the physical sense, but a measure for the moment that a graph-based regulator seems to reveal a signal that comes out quite clearly from the background noise. This signal seems to come from the amorphous binary star that I was talking about before. We would therefore have a kind of correlation, Meyerson would speak of equality, to avoid causality, and therefore an explanation of notions closely linked to each other in identity and reality. Meyerson would demand the transmission of a kind of vehicle between cause and effect, of an agent, a substance that keeps an identity. This is why Nielsen talks about conservation in his chapters on the conservation of the Earth, of energy and so on. He keeps an identity between the sands, between the binaries and the detectors. And for the maintenance of a clear identity, he would require, here, conservation. But conservation is variable. Without which, it would be an exaggeration of equality. We see the relevance of such associations of conservation, such as Mersot, Democritus, or Platon, but in my opinion it has a relevance. What is the relevance of this association of conservation of causalities?

2:30 Because even with an apparent regulation, which in any case will not be sensible to the public, our belief in the language of physics will not be able to get rid of the constraints that question the conservation of constraints imposed by Einstein. A simple equality without causal explanation, based on invariant conservation, can lead to skepticism easily ingrained by the abundant noise in which the signal could be or could not be opened. In the meantime, the physical sense of the double subordination of the structure to the film by matter remains therefore obscure while waiting for an experimental clarification. Laini Touma, to support a strong relativity of movement, could, meanwhile, insist on the genius ideas of the conservation law and even exclude the radicals, perhaps of the same generation, as opinions, by asserting that reality, the physical sense, must necessarily rely on invariance. We must also remind ourselves that if energy had to concern only matter and not time as well, To come back to the question of the objective structure, it would be represented by this objective structure, and not by the fine structure, there would still be four more liberties to be set aside, such as physical sense, but we do not know well the physical sense and the choice of gauge that brings us back to the fine structure of the human body, because it is the end. Let's admit that the relative movement has to relate to something, it's a bit of a word game, but by something, what else can I say? I'm talking about a material object endowed with mass for all, it's the same question, the same argument. So, once again, it's a strong materiality, it's not an opinion, otherwise, if this condition is not satisfied, it's an absolute movement. Disturbing an universe, to come back to the plane, disturbing an empty universe, it's a very deep level, it has nothing to do with reality, it's obvious. An empty universe with this flat harmonic, introducing another object, an observer, who errs.

5:00 And by erring, he will vary his frequency in each plane. It will be able to construct its absolute speed more or less because there is only one objective angle, which does not satisfy the condition imposed on it of materiality of things through this formula. It will see an euclid effect. If it moves to the left, it sees that the frequency increases. If it moves in the opposite direction, it decreases. Here we have the absolute space-time, Newtonian substantival, I add this to the end, it may have something to do with me, but I think it's enough, Newtonian substantival, used, I didn't find it in Newton, but Newton doesn't seem to use words that look like a substantival, but the literature that we have in 10 centuries, that we have studied, is full of what we call the Sensorium. It's a new term, isn't it? Is it a subject on the subject? It doesn't seem to be on the subject. Let's leave it if you want. So, space-time would be absolute insofar as it brings, according to the arbitrary criterion that has been adopted, it brings an undeniably absolute movement. But a substantive reification of space-time would produce a change of category, making it pass from non-existent to non-existent. Space-time would become, in this case, something of reference, constantly here the absolute movement in the latin. There would therefore be a tension between the substantiality and the absolute character of this turbulent space-time. Newton, throughout the program in general, would rewrite it. Absolute space is a similar and immobile center. It remains always semblable to itself, but immobile. We have seen that Newton wanted to arrive at the motus, here I am not completely sure, because before, I said that the motus that existed before was an acceleration, and here it has become a displacement, we have seen that Newton, in these phrases that I have cited, there are several on the screen,

7:30 They can help you through these causes and effects, through forces. And here, it is precisely the movement on top that the proposed experiment would indicate. Through forces, exactly like Newton's Euclid. Forces, let's say, made by a dynamometer, an instrument of great sensitivity, which joints the masses. So, the length of the passage is like this. It is the axis that joins the perpendicular axis. If you join the masses in the observer, you record the oscillations of the variable frequencies of the omega. There is no particular conclusion. André? It would be nice if Mr. Bonsol could better understand, but it's like that. In fact, a big part of this problem... It already comes from mathematics because there is a tension between the two approaches and I will tell you how, because you can't say anything. They don't work if we approach the Malian program in the same way as the Riemannian general case, in the sense that you can't just define the... You can't just define the name by the means of the group theory expressed by the Riemannians. What can you do? You can do... Key terms include topology, geometry, algebra, analysis, quantum mechanics, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, algebra, These were the groups, and we will see in a certain group of transformations, so it does not mean that it does not work in the world.

10:00 It doesn't work in a simple way in my case with the general community. So let's say the approach is a little more contemporary, it's of course, and it's also a bit of historicality because today we say it's not at all these groups, they're not fundamental groups, they're square groups. We're talking about groupoids. Groupoids, that is to say, it's something where you don't have all the... There are also some questions about the possibility of... We should never discuss this, because if we say that what we want is objective, even in this general case, there is something that we structure globally, there is no sense in saying that we don't want anything in terms of local consumption, but still, it sounds like something real. Are they in the same universe or not? It's a question of re-evolution. But you have to look at this space to understand it. There are also two other strategies. With the law of conservation, which is not linked. Yes, but in what sense? First of all, when you say coherence, it's not the right thing to say. I think there are two strategies. One of them is a strategy that can be done... But mathematically or philologically? No, no, I don't mean historically, but what happens a little later, what we can do with these problems, let's say. I think that part of it is written in the history of physics, but I don't think that's the problem. But I see a little two things. And one thing, it's exactly for... You told me it's a tensor, it's not a tensor, that is, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not,

12:30 Yes, and all the sources of tension that are, well, the temps, it seems to me, that change the masses. I don't know if you can see it, but I don't know if you can see it, but I don't know if you can see it, but I don't know if you can see it, but I don't know if you can see it, So, it depends on the level of the second professor. I would like to explain myself. I would like to ask you a question. You know that I have been here for a million years, and I have never been here. I have been here for a million years, and I have never been here. Thank you very much, thank you very much, thank you very much, thank you very much, thank you very much, thank you very much, thank you very much, thank you very much, thank you very much, thank you very much, thank you very much, thank you very much, thank you very much, thank you very much, thank you very much, thank you very much, thank you very much, thank you very much, thank you very much, thank you very much, thank you very much, thank you very much, It is necessary to know the mass, to know the mass, and to know the energy. It is confusing. It is confusing. There are many examples. There are many examples. There are many examples. There are many examples. For example, when we know that light has energy because it has energy, but not mass. This is what is relativistic. I heard inertia and acceleration in the sense of a classification of the universe, a classification that obviously depends on the question, a classification of natural movements and movements that are derived by a kind of intrusion, a kind of intrusion, foreign influence.

15:00 This is what I heard about inertia, and so by inertia I mean structures, in reality in general, in my opinion, these are fine structures where you do not hear a mass. I do not understand why inertia, without a mass, is not possible. It is an identification possible, but it does not mean that there is no other. Thank you very much for your time. There are dozens of Marx's principles, and we can give him all kinds of interpretations. My interpretation is something like this. Matter determines inertia, and as I said, we have to establish in the theory studied, in the theory in question, the meaning of matter and the meaning of inertia. Yes, but matter determines inertia of the system. Inertia determines energy. There is a freedom of interpretation that I have exploited to determine the meaning that suits me to the term. But it's not completely perverse attributions, there are others that use a vocabulary that looks like the one I proposed.

17:30 You just have to look at the volume of Barber, Lister, you didn't find all of this series of blue volumes on the web. There is a certain... there is a certain freedom, a certain hope. What was the destiny of this idea of Einstein? What idea? Well, I'm a dancer and... You do it in a modern way. Yes, today we call each other with Liao, Witten... I haven't talked about them because I'm not quite sure, but I think they are in the spirit of L'Escamotage d'Einstein of the late 19th century. And in the modern world, we still have this phenomenon. It's a point of view that's more or less accepted. Well, I don't know, I don't know, I don't know. The point of view of Einstein has more or less triumphant. The law of conservation is the same as in Immanuel, this law of conservation that is mentioned and the impulsive energy, or let's say the intensity of impulsive energy attributed to the field of the national law is that of... Re-emergence of space, time and space, time and space. Re-emergence of space. There are logical spaces that can be exploited to defend relativist or relational positions, quite strong ones.

20:00 It's not determined by theory, they don't talk about it. Well, with the theory, you can say the absolute space, you can try to relativize it, at least the same. But let's say that the theory is the same, and it gives you a choice between an absolutist view of this space-time, and the theory itself. I have tried to represent these spaces which allow a certain freedom, but they are heresies, they are not orthodox spaces, we should accept the concept of conservation. Yes, precisely. I feel that this theory of 118 is true because we know that Einstein did not really understand the energy demonstration in the General Institute. That's what he showed in the studies of David Rowe. It is precisely at this moment that Emmy Noether will learn the meaning of the energy demonstration in the General Institute, in Klein, Hilbert and Einstein. The meaning, a relationship between the two. The sense is a bit strong, it underlines the reports. Einstein will reconnect with the report of Demi-Nocturne. He doesn't know his comprehension of the energy consumption, and so he will reconnect with this report. I know that there is an excellent article by D. B. Leroux in The Smart Universe on this subject. I know the volume, yes. His article is very interesting. Yes, yes, of course. All of these terms are very useful to know all the answers of the last few years. With Neuter, Klein, Hilbert and Einstein, it moves a lot, but after Neuter, there will be a lot more stability in the interpretation of the equation of energy in general, which seems to me to be enough to have a stability of energy, whatever you want, in space, to play the game.

22:30 But it seems to me that, first of all, they are not the same thing compared to the history of quantum physics. So, first of all, I must admit that all these variational approaches, I find them mathematically very heavy. And I leave that to Tom Reitman, Harvey Brown, Catherine Brayden and these people who studied in great detail all these questions And that said, I don't think that these formulations or variational formulations represent a solution to the problem. It's not that, it's not that. No, what I meant was, it was in relation to your approach on the indications for Einstein. In relation to his lectures in 1978, it seems that he will return to Canada very soon, because in the meantime, he has already read them. Yes, I have to read them. For the moment, I have read on these questions some of the articles that I have quoted, but I don't know where they are. There is an article that has just come out of The Life and the Breathing. Time and time again, we will have a graduate who will install Mr. Corsi on the last number of our engagement. I'm sure of his variational approaches, conservation... Thank you very much indeed. Oh, are you going to be around? What are your plans?

25:00 I don't know. I don't think it was the same quote. There is a reception for the thing at the Sorbonne, but I mean, I'll just wait for a quick glass of wine. Why don't we just meet up in the back, and I'll just see if it's possible. Okay, um, just to talk about something with André. The thing is, I must dash now, otherwise I'll be late for the, um, anyway. Thank you.