doc(Relativity): Correct documentation for realLorentzTensor - #1712
Conversation
|
Thank you for this pull-request (PR). If this is your first PR, welcome to the community! Below is what will happen next. Please read carefully if you are not familiar with the process. You may open other PRs while this one is being reviewed, and can stack PRs on top of each other, so don't let these steps slow you down.
Tip: The easiest way to get have a fast review is to submit a PR that is small and self-contained, and has clear documentation explaining why things are the way they are in your chages. If you have any problems or questions, please reach out to the community on the Zulip. |
|
@ereinhardt8 Good question, in this case it is the full Lorentz group, so should be (Btw the build errors here are not yours so no need to fix them.) |
jstoobysmith
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
One comment, related to the question.
|
awaiting-author |
Co-authored-by: Joseph Tooby-Smith <72603918+jstoobysmith@users.noreply.github.com>
|
-awaiting-author |
jstoobysmith
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Approved - will merge now. Many thanks.
00849d2
This pull request fixes issues #1532 and #1538 by replacing occurrences of "complex" with "real" within doc-comments in
Physlib/Relativity/Tensors/RealTensor/Basic.leanandPhyslib/Relativity/Tensors/RealTensor/Metrics/Basic.lean.Reviewer Guide
Quick question: Is SO⁺(1, 3) the correct group to use at line 28 of
Physlib/Relativity/Tensors/RealTensor/Basic.lean? Or would O(1, 3) be better? (I do not know quite enough about Lie groups.)Thank you!