On Saturday, June 7, 2025 at 7:14:56 AM UTC-6 John Clark wrote:
On Sat, Jun 7, 2025 at 8:10 AM Alan Grayson <[email protected]> wrote: *> Where in Feynman's argument does he assume the Principle of Least Action and Time-translation invariance to conclude Conservation of Energy around a closed loop? AG * *Where? I don't understand the question. Feynman showed that IF you can formulate classical mechanics using the Principle of Least Action, AND IF the system has time-translation symmetry, THEN Noether tells us that the conservation of energy is a logical necessity. * *BUT can we successfully formulate classical mechanics using the Principle of Least Action? Only experimentation can answer that question. And does our universe have time-translation symmetry? Only observation can answer that question. * * John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>* I see you haven't looked at the link I posted. CM can be derived by several methods, such as applying Hamilton's or Lagrange's as the starting point. So what Feynman did is irrelevant to the issue I've raised; whether Conservation of Energy on a closed loop can be derived independent of the principles you cite. AG -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/6c488a5c-a6e6-4995-adbf-ca8b1e583e92n%40googlegroups.com.
