studiot

In what context? Did you really mean to post this in homework, where there are special rules? Before you answer can I point out that new starters can only post 5 posts in the first 24 hours so don't waste them. Give a full and proper explanation of what you are trying to do.

So why are relativity experimenters always zeroing their clocks? No we usually call it the date but isn't the date a form of time?

Have they moved the First Point of Aries since I last looked?

Clocks do not measure time. They measure time difference or elapsed time.

Since you have asserted the direct opposite of my comment I feel I should reply. What exactly are an elecrton and a positron if not two bodies?

I see you have been here a fair time so should know the rules by now. Members should not expect to trawl other sites in general or facebook in particular to view you input. Be glad the moderator has only issued a green note not a red one in your whinging thread.

If I understand your device correctly, the (horizontal?) disk we see in the pic is the 'bob' of the pendulum, which is suspended by the three wires we see. The shaft you refer to is really a locating or centering pin and no shaft work is input or extracted. It is not clear how the motion is driven/activated. Presumably the oscillatory action is a twisting one. So is the bob set in motion and then allowd to twist freely back and fore under the influence of the support wires? Or is the head the head or top end of the wires driven to oscillate back and fore? Either way you are interested in the interaction between the locating pin and the disk. Have you set up 3D Euler axes in your program? I say this because the three wires are set at angles so will induce a 3D system of torques in the disk. In turn the disk will jam against the locating pin to produce counter torques. It is not practical, if indeed possible, to calculate these counter torques directly, but they will be equal and opposite (good old Newton) to the loading torques from the tnesions in the wires. That is why your search was fruitless. Presumably the contraption motion is sufficiently gently such that wires all remain taught at all times?

Gees, I'm glad you like my offering. Remember it is an attempt to discuss the God concept in the abstract. I don't claim it is comprehensive - feel free to add / amend to improve it. That is what true discussion is for. Personally I am a 'don't care' in that it makes no difference to me or how I think or act. I think I was about 12 when I worked out for myself that an almighty entity is a self contradiction. Anything less is just a 'super' being further up the food chain; something Man could (one day) aspire to.

Thanks, pulley problems were once very popular in high school applied maths. Since you are interested here is a slightly more complicated one fully worked.

I asked this because I don't agree that the change can happen either instantaneously, or at the speed of light. But I also think that the speed of change is not constant.

If a suitable conductor intersects that collapsing field yes. This would be the second body I mentioned in your other thread about this subject.

So how is the positive charge applied to one plate and how is it then removed 'instantaneously' ?

Thanks it will take some time to read those links, but I will come back to you.

Thanks, but I don't disagree with most of what you have proposed, I wish to add to it not contradict it. But you thread was entitled 'the God Concept', not a General Study of Consciousness, and it is simply that concept I am addressing. Further we can consider this concept in the abstract, just as we can consider a particular arangement of sand grains on the beach - whether or not such an arrangement has ever happened. Back to 'God', (and scrabble) When we look around us we can posit one of the following :- 1) It has always been that way so there was no beginning. 2) Things change but something has always been so again no beginning. 3) There was a beginning which was deliberately brought about by a creator. 4) There was a beginning that was accidentally brought about by a creator. 5) There was a beginning but it was not the result of an external agent. Focusing for a moment on (3) 3a) The creator set the 'board' and established the rules and then played no further (active) part. This scenario is rather like a game of scrabble ehere the game creator specified the board and the playing rules but then leaves the game to the participants. This version allows for a reasonable concept of free will. Many different games are possible depending upon the size of the board and number of pieces. 3b) The creator sets the board, established the rules and occasionally 'meddles' ie intervenes in some way. He might even have incorporated 'get out of jail cards' in the original design. 3c) The creator sets the board, establishes the rules and meticulously monitors every activity and reacts in some way to them. 3d) The creator sets the board, establishes the rules and meticulously monitors every activity. Additionally the creator has a preferred evolution of the game and intervenes to push it in this direction. A complete lack of free will.

I'm sorry I didn't make myself clear. I was only asking about Maxwell and not referring to your magic instantaneous capacitor at all. That would be off topic here. Theories of gravitation are probably also off topic since the thread was about 'what is space?' I'm sure you have interesting questions to ask. Please ask in these in their own thread (one topic per thread) though by all means refer to another thread and say "this was inspired by" and refer to another thread.

@ Hulk You seem to be annoying someone here, judging from your increasing collection of red points. I don't normally give these but this is the last time I will answer a question of yours if you don't engage in discussion about the subject. This list looks very similar to the one I gave last time you asked this question. https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/116128-if-an-inductor-requires-a-changing-current-to-produce-a-voltage-drop-across-itself/ The short answer is that in all cases the energy is due to the interaction of two bodies endowed with the property of interest. It is measured as work done positioning these bodies relative to each other. In more technical words two sources. In the case of magnetic fields one body may also self interact since a single source magnetic (magnetic monopole) has never been seen. The field itself is a mathematical construct, not some magic fluid you 'pump up' with energy.

Can you provide references for this idea? Maxwell reviewed the attempts by many others to explain gravity and found them all wanting., for example he said of the separate theories of Le Sage, Challis, Kelvin:_ He did show that In other words he showed the form of what we now call gravitational potential is the same as that of what we now call electrical potential. He also rejected what was known as 'the electrical theory', whereby it was proposed that the force of attraction between unit charges of opposite sign was/is marginally greater than the force of repulsion between unit charges of the same sign which was offered to account for gravity. As the greatest physicist of his age he was busy with many thigs which is probably why he never had time to get round to relativity. That came half a century later with Einstein. (he died in 1879)

+1

Coming from the South I first went to uni in the English Midlands (in the 1960s) where South meets North. There I was introduced to Newcastle Brown (from the North) at the 'freshers fair' and after a bevy or three I went round the fair to see what clubs I could join. I came across the trampolining club, with equipment set out to catch freshers. I bounced up and down on said tramp going on stone cold sober. Then I jumped off - drunk as a Lord. Bend your ...............legs they shouted. I swear the whole hall shook when I shock landed. Hulk The moral of this is that you would like Newcastle Brown, of all the dark beers because it is very sweet. Most dark beers are quite bitter.

Good advice and good pics +1 There is a condition that m1 does not move either up or down and the string just slips through. However this set of values does not meet that condition which is 4m2m3 = m1(m2 + m3)

The energy (per unit volume) of an electric field is [math]\frac{1}{2}DE[/math] Joules/m3 Where E is the electric field and D the electric displacement. The energy (per unit volume) of a magnetic field is [math]\frac{1}{2}BH[/math] Joules/m3 Where B and H are magnetic field vectors The energy (per unit volume) of an elastic field is [math]\frac{1}{2}stress\;x\;strain[/math] Joules/m3 The energy (per unit volume) of an gravitational field is [math]\frac{1}{2}{D_0}g[/math] Joules/m3 Where D0 is the gravitational flux and g the local gravitational constant Can you see a pattern here?

At high school we were issued with 'rough books' to copy down what was said at speed and 'best books' to present it properly. I remember one teacher saying "The more times you write something down, the danger there is you will remember it". In these more modern times, we had a postgrad pharmacology student staying who had repeat access to the lectures online. She played them back again and again in short burts until she was word perfect. She has just got a distinction. So the word is repetition. Are you going to respond to your magnetic thread?

What does the conservation Law state? In an isolated system charge is conserved. So in your isolation box you have one elctron and one proton, net system charge zero. Apply your favourite annihilation method (which is? ) Result net system charge zero. +1 for the Conservation Laws.

The path of ions in a rotating plasma can be shown to be be spiral in 2D or helical in 3D. This is due to the 'Coriolis Effect'.