J.C.MacSwell

Which direction is the BB...exactly? Why is it not just as much here, as over there, where ever that is?

Apparently not understood by you...but I assure you I mean no trouble. Much of your inputs here are misleading with regard to mechanics. I was simply pointing it out. By "making stuff up" with regard to Cavendish balls, I meant adding something to the system that was not included. The Cavendish balls are constrained in a manner not described in what we are discussing, and not only that but there are 4 of them constrained within an apparatus, not 2 in free space...just so you know.

I know what the experiment is about. Anything else that is irrelevant you would like to add? There are no balls set up as described by the Cavendish experiment in quiet's description. None.

Sorry Studiot. I certainly do not! We are discussing a system as described, with 2 equal masses some distance apart in space. All I know of the system is what was described. two equal masses in space, some distance apart....I know of no other balls, Cavendish or otherwise. The masses of the balls are fixed by any given distance, and any given acceleration...unless you want to make stuff up...such as Cavendish balls Why not just use your hands? Why not say "no JC, the acceleration is zero because I'm holding them apart" and then ask me to guess what the masses might be? Invoking something other than what is described no longer works for the equations...why would they?

Where a = 0 in the described setup, F, and m are also = 0 (you could argue it is undefined, and indeed there would be no real system in that case) Why can you not substitute a/F for mass in a mechanics equation, when you do so in a correct and meaningful way? (or if by substitute mass you mean to create a massless system? quiet did not do that, the above exception where a is set at zero notwithstanding)

Sorry Studiot, but I believe this is misleading with respect to Newtonian Mechanics, where gravity is simply another force. (I realize it is now in speculations, but was moved from Classical Physics, and the equations all derived from Newtonian) The equations as combined make sense, though perhaps not good sense as the result is confusing and not very useful (I maintain it is accurate)

Note: this is not with respect to any one system, but with respect to the choice of system (mass pairs) required for the fixed acceleration.

Mass in each equation, both 1 and 2, is assumed to be the same. If you don't believe me dig Newton up and ask him. (whether they should be is debatable, but our evidence to this point in time has them as equivalent. Nothing wrong with the algebra. Nothing wrong with Equation 3. Though I don't see much use in that form, it is still valid. Given the acceleration, and distance, it will in fact give you the gravitational force between the two unknown equal masses. But that does not mean the force is proportional to distance squared. Acceleration depends on the distance (and the masses). If acceleration was independent of the distance you could conclude the force is proportional to distance squared, but acceleration is not. This is the key. Let's say we are observing two equal masses orbiting each other in space, in a perfect circle. We measure their distance apart and centripetal acceleration. The greater the distance is, the much greater the masses must be, and the much greater the force must be, to maintain that constant acceleration. So in this specific set of cases of fixed acceleration you can say the force is proportional to the distance squared.

Since acceleration in the formula is dependant on distance...it is simply incorrect to conclude that With regard to force and distance? Force is inversely proportional to distance squared, same as it was in equation (1), but now less obvious.

OK, thanks for the link.

Can it explain what you need help with?

There are really no reasons left not to dismiss that one...

Can you elaborate on this? When was that? He was born in Edinburgh, correct? Apologies if that is OT.

I was thinking yes, it is possible, but can see an objection to the use of the term, as Strange points out. I don't personally have any objection as the luminiferous aether of Newton has been clearly ruled out. Whatever it is cannot be fixed to any frame we would readily recognize...including any inertial frame.

A lot of good advice on all sides of this. It is good Raider that you are thinking it through very thoroughly. One thing with regard to the job itself, because it sounds like it may allow for an education in and of itself compared to most jobs 16 year olds have. My questions would be about how transferable the skills and knowledge you gain at work might be? If the company does not do as well as they hoped, is it in an industry that would still thrive? How competitive would your skill set be moving forward? You have a lot to consider. Finishing another term would put you where? Your Employer may look at you as even more important to them at that time than currently. I like much of CY's advice. You should have a good discussion with your Employer if your plans and options include them.

What is the essence of distance? Why is it that the wave cannot transverse faster or slower across it? Why can it not arrive sooner or later?

I agree he doesn't want to make that defence, whether true or not...he is in fact married. He's made that commitment...but not to us. Your Dad sounds like a pretty stand up guy. The World needs more like him.

I always put myself in the other persons shoes. I am 6 years older than my wife (she says 7, which is totally wrong, as we met slightly over a month after her 24th birthday, and I was 30, and would not turn 31 for almost a full month). We met on a blind date so no PC concerns I know of at this time. But I always ask myself...what if we had met and I was subordinate to her, or she to me? What kind of perpetrator might I, or (I would hope) she, have been?

Nor is anyone else. First of all, as already discussed, the luminiferous ether as per the concept as we know it is inconsistent with our measurements. We know it doesn't work. I think an argument for considering "something" is that we have come to agree on a physical model where a photon leaving the Sun arrives some 8 minutes later, the exact time varying in an exact way, very accurately and consistent with our model. So what is it about this distance that doesn't allow the photon to arrive in 6 minutes? Or 6 years? We don't know what it is about the photon that does the accounting for this consistency, or anything about the space between the Sun and the Earth that would allow for such consistency either. We really don't know if there is something actually needed to do this accounting or not, we just know if there is it is not the type of mechanism we have yet imagined.

Ok, quiet. Fair enough. A reason to keep it, or rather resurrect it in a modified form, could be facilitated by extra dimensions. Credible attempts have been made earlier by Kaluza-Klein and others, and later string theorists, but nothing come up with yet has fully made sense.

I was. Thanks for the correction. +1. I need to keep better track of my science history. OTOH, did you know that leeches have been back in use for some time? http://sciencenetlinks.com/science-news/science-updates/modern-leeching/ OT: The luminiferous ether was assumed to be fixed to some preferred frame, but measurements of the speed of light, and in electricity and magnetism, indicated otherwise. Edit: I see Carrock was much quicker

Indeed. Next time you are caught in the bitter cold without a sweater...futilely rubbing your hands together..you won't be so quick to shun it's existence...you'll wish you had more of it

Something fabricated leaving our solar system. Isn't this when they realize we have become semi-intelligent... and come and destroy us?

No.

I thought it was rhetorical. If it wasn't... The light blue is a common type of additional protection...flexible enough to put on and reduce the forces further in case of a drop or whatever. It is not optimized for it's size to protect the device any more than another hard outer shell with an even lighter padding inside could be. It is just very simple and practical.