Timeline for The Einstein minus convention, lost
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 27, 2021 at 12:27 | history | bounty ended | Martin Gisser | ||
| Apr 25, 2021 at 19:45 | vote | accept | Martin Gisser | ||
| Apr 23, 2021 at 20:32 | comment | added | Martin Gisser | Methinks I can click "answered". Still I'm puzzled. Why then not just turn the {} symbols upside down? | |
| Apr 23, 2021 at 20:15 | comment | added | Martin Gisser | This is sweet reading compared to the messy Weyl book! In formula (67) he introduces a minus out of no reason, like Hermann Weyl loc.cit. Thus an ugly geodesic equation. But Einstein's parallel transport equation (no number, right after the snippet) looks nicer without the "Einstein minus". :-) | |
| Apr 23, 2021 at 19:56 | comment | added | Martin Gisser | Thanks! I haven't yet sufficiently checked Hermann Weyl's Space Time Matter (plus his comment on Riemmanns Probevorlesung 1854. See my comment to my question. First eds. are 1918/9. In the later editions I got the minus gone. (Yes, one of my bibliophile treasures is an original 1923 Springer Verlag booklet. - But I don't have the internets line & equipment to dig out snippets like yours. Much appreciated! Alas for the next days I wont have nerves & time to check more.) | |
| Apr 21, 2021 at 12:23 | history | edited | Carlo Beenakker | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 4 characters in body
|
| Apr 21, 2021 at 11:19 | history | edited | Carlo Beenakker | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 5 characters in body
|
| Apr 21, 2021 at 10:53 | history | edited | Carlo Beenakker | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 70 characters in body
|
| Apr 21, 2021 at 10:28 | history | answered | Carlo Beenakker | CC BY-SA 4.0 |