Bufofrog

You do not need a chart. \[Cross Section Area = MF \times \frac{1}{\rho} \times \frac{1}{V} \] So for water, a MF of 1Kg/s at a velocty of 100 cm/s the cross section would need to be 10 cm^2 or a pipe diameter of 3.568 cm.

If the virtual particles appear and immediately disappear, then nothing is added.

Hmmm.

OK, discuss...

That doesn't make sense to me. It is fine to say that the earth is not moving through space, instead space is moving past earth, but it becomes very problematic if you add other bodies. If space is moving past the earth so that it appears that the earth is moving around the sun, then obviously the space cannot be moving past the sun at the same rate and direction that it is moving past the earth. In other words if bodies are moving relative to each other, but it is really space that is moving, then the space is moving differently for each body.

"It is better to stand in the light of the sun than to step on a garden rack". - Co

You are seriously misrepresenting the replies to your thread "mental momentum". There was one post which could be considered a personal attack and you received an apology for that comment. What actually happened is several members took the time to read your posts and supplied you with valid critiques that you did not like. Instead of addressing those critiques you made the following statement after you were asked to stop blogging: "It appears my material has become too good to be criticized." It seems to me you have been treated very well. Most of the members, me included, do not agree with you 'theory'. If you cannot take constructive criticism then maybe you should not be presenting your ideas to the public. I think you should get over it and quit trying to be a martyr.

Thanks for your reply. To be sure I completely disagree with you, I think there is ample evidence showing that the equations for gravity using Newtons equations and general relativity work very well. Do you have equations for orbital mechanics using your hypothesis? Would your hypothesis be falsified if we were to find 2 bodies that orbit each other, even though your equations said that there influence was less than their distance from each other?

Do you think Mars orbits the Sun because of the gravity from the Sun but not the gravity from Mars because the gravity from Mars does not reach the Sun?

No. Never.

Deleted, due to a brain fart....

He is not predictable, since he is unbalanced. I don't think any course he takes would surprise me. He never has had any strategy in foreign policy.

Welcome. I think you mean solar systems not universes. We have found "earth like" planets orbiting stars that are not like our sun. A rocket that fired all its fuel at once is essentially a cannon. The g-forces would kill the Astronauts. I am glad you are thinking about these things. The thing about science is the more you learn the more fun it is.

Yes!!! The equation is nonsensical. It cannot be quantified!

Then use that impressive IQ to learn some physics!

[Groan....]

The typical purpose of writing is to communicate, your purpose in writing seems to have some other goal. I do note that magnetism seems to be a major part of your hypothesis and I do not recall that being mentioned until this post. Are you making this up as you go along? I will attempt to state your hypothesis is a manner that is understandable: When the sun and the moon are in the right alignment the earths magnetic field energy can be concentrated in the area of a fault and trigger an earth quake. Is that what you are trying to say? By the way, Natural Event does not mean Natural Selection.

Then the world is losing it's mind, I guess. This is a bit of a hijack i suppose, but the thread is a train wreck anyway...

I am sure you can, however if this whole 'shooting match' is based on a lack of understanding of physics - it is just a fantasy. I am afraid the only question that will be asked is, "if you are interested in physics, why don't you learn some physics?" We aren't remotely close to even the most basic physics in this thread. Your BS is in Anthropology so let me use that as a basis to help you understand the problem here. Suppose I went to an anthropology forum and said I have 'the' answer! If everyone wore an orange shirt mankind would live in peace for all of eternity. That is about how much sense your ideas are making. If you find physics interesting for goodness sake learn some physics!

This is incorrect. Acceleration is not squared, the speed of light is squared. This is incorrect. The addition of energy + friction is meaningless. It is like adding Apples + oranges to get bananas. Your definition of form is lacking. What are the units of form? What is the difference between the form of the Moon VS the form of the Earth. This is incorrect. It is still geometry? No mater how you slice any shape at all you still have geometry. The rest of the post is more inaccuracies and confused misunderstandings. I would highly recommend that you ask questions instead of making things up that don't really even make any sense.

So there is nothing specific? You just want to know about fluids? The 2 routes I see are: 1. Google fluid mechanics. Start with Wiki and then concentrate on .edu sites, or 2. Get a degree in Chemical Engineering. I guess you could just look at density and viscosity as a starting point.

That is a really broad question. There are hundreds if not thousands of books written about fluid mechanics and fluid dynamics. I have 2 on my office book shelf. Can you focus your question a bit (like a lot)? If not, I would suggest googling fluid mechanics as the start of your journey.

Sorry Bez, but could not find anything in this post that was correct or made sense.

I have no idea what that is suppose to mean. So ultraviolet light is somehow involved in some sort of process that is self propagating? How is that related to the discussion? What is the gravitational relationship? It almost seems like you are trying to be obtuse. I think you are simply saying when the moon is at perigee the moon's gravity triggers earth quakes. If it is something else couldn't you just simply state it like that?

I for one cannot figure out what your hypothesis is. Can't you just write what your hypotheses is in one of 2 sentences?