20 Oct 2008
Text colors: Evans in
Subject: Use of the Kronecker Delta in Cartan Geometry
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2008 05:54:30 EDT
The definition used in Cartan geometry is given by Carroll in his chapter three:
q sup mu sub a q sup a sub nu = delta sup mu sub nu (1)
Note that a factor 4 does not appear by definition.
The notation means that the right hand side of eq. (1) is 1 when mu is the same as nu,
and is 0 otherwise.
OK. Carroll's original equation is with e instead of q
which means that the matrices (eμa) and (eaν)
are mutually inverses: The matrix products yield
(eμa)(eaν) = I = diag(1,1,1,1) and
(eaμ) (eμb) = I = diag(1,1,1,1) as well.
Note that Eqs.(3.116) tacitly make use of the
Einstein summation convention that wrt double indices
(a / a and μ / μ respectively) must be summed automatically.
And now Evans continues erroneously
eμa eaν = δμν ,
eaμ eμb = δab .
(3.116)
. . . So:
q sup nu sub a q sup a sub nu = 1 - (2)
i.e.
which is a wrong conclusion: Substituting μ with ν additionally implies
Einstein summation over the double index ν:
Instead of applying the rules of tensor calculus according to the textbooks Evans complains about ''Bruhn's cynical lies'':
qνa qaν = 1 .
qνa qaν = δνν =
δ00 + δ11 + δ22 + δ33 = 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 4.
Evans erroneously ignores here the Einstein summation convention,
which is generally applied in tensor calculus.
. . . that Bruhn very cynically contrives lies. The Bruhn
lie-site put in a factor 4 in order to cause confusion.
The fact that some standard editors are in collusion with Bruhn means that the general public must do
something to stop funding these people.
In GCUFT5 the correct mathematics will be given, as in GCUFT1 to GCUFT4.
Every single entry in the lie-site is meant to cause confusion and to misrepresent
my work or anyone who works with me. The general public is asked to pay for this lie-site.
I block Bruhn and completely refuse to be drawn into any correspondence with him. An application of Evans' above-mentioned fallacy was already criticized in that
Commentary.
Now Evans lies himself!!! Or Carroll???
In
GCUFT 5 Chap.12 we read on p.6
Let us call a spade a spade.
Civil List Scientist
OK. Let us call a spade a spade:
ECE ''theory'' is nonsense from GCUFT1 to GCUFT5.
That all is based on Evans' New Math,
i.e. on a long list of rather trivial but
far reaching math errors
that were reported on this site.
Complement on Oct 25 2008:
Evans' Chapter12 2008/10/17 18:17 page 6 #6
. . .
derived from the tetrad normalization [13]:
qaνqνa = 4
(12.17)
[13] is Carroll's book.
HOME