traveler Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 (edited) Well, I did... is there a difference between his physics and my physics? Yes, you make incorrect statements, so I can't trust your knowledge of physics. D H has made nothing but correct statements, but he has yet to respond to how he would make the equation of my theory. Big difference there. You can shout as loud as you want to, and call me troll all you like, you are wrong! Doesn't matter. Force is applied. Multiple forces are applied. So what, we are measuring the rate of change of velocity. What is the objects velocity towards the center of the Earth??? Only when you calculate the total force it's gone. So what, we are measuring acceleration, which is the rate of change of VELOCITY! If you've bothered to read my visual example, then think of two situations with the cart of stones on an ice rink:1. The full cart is standing, alone, in the middle of the rink, without moving. 2. The full cart is standing in the middle of the rink while I push on one side and big314mp is pushing from the other side at the same force. If you don't see the physical, practical and realistic difference between two cases (which it seems your statements show you don't), then you have some basic physics studying to do, my friend. I'm not the one having a problem understanding and describing reality accurately, you are. Did I say anything about the different forces that act on different bodies that result in a NET FORCE? I am talking about the rate of change of velocity (acceleration) of an object. What are you talking about, a full cart that moves 0 feet, regardless of the duration observed? There is a huge difference between the statement "there is no force" and the statement "the forces cancel each other out". NET FORCE. I am talking about gravity being proportional to the difference in mass, and inversely proportional to the distance. NET FORCE causes acceleration. The objects velocity is ZERO. Do you know what velocity is? Evidently not. Actually, that too depends what you are looking at. Wrong again. We are talking about an objects distance from the center of the Earth at one moment, compared to the objects distance from the center of the Earth at another moment, which means a duration has elapsed (elapsed time), because objects don't have "instant" motion, it takes time for change to occur!!!. Physics is about perspective. If you look at the object while you're next to it that might be true (that there is no movement, not that there is no force), but if you look at it from a space shuttle, that is absolutely NOT true; the object moves along with the Earth. Perspective has nothing to do with it. If I tell you I am x amount of distance from the center of the Earth, and 10 minutes later I am still the exact same distance from the center of the Earth, my VELOCITY towards the center of the Earth is 0 m/s , it has NOTHING to do with perspective, it has everything to do with a measurement of motion (or lack thereof). The moon's a great example. If you look from the surface of the Earth during the night, then the moon never rotates, it just orbits the Earth, but does not rotate - you can never see its "dark side" (meh) - it's far side is never ever facing the Earth. Practically speaking, it's not rotating. But that's not so. The moon *does* rotate, it just completes a rotation cycle the same time it completes an orbit cycle, which causes it to 'always face' the Earth. That doesn't mean it's not rotating.... Do you want to talk about rotation, or the distance of the radius?? I can talk about rotational velocity as well. I also understand EXACTLY what torque is, so go for it. TROLL. Scream it louder! I explained this, D H explained this, I even gave out links (3 in the beginning, one more later) that EXPLAIN why gravity is acceleration, and why even when there's no speed there is still force, and why that observation is very important. You ignored it, you keep asking a question that was already answered. That's called TROLLING. We are talking about acceleration, not force. I am not asking you how much force you apply to the Earth, and how much it applies back. I am asking you your velocity, and your acceleration towards the center of the Earth! Go back up and read it again, I have already answered, and I've used physics to answer you. You provided erroneous information. Well, technically, you've travelled with the ball, so the distance RELATIVE TO YOU, hadn't changed, but that's physics 201, and you seem to have troubles with the basics, so let's ignore that for a moment. Your definitions are simply, quite bluntly, wrong. No, you are, and I've shown why. There's nothing more to it than that. Acceleration is part of force and it is existing whenever there is a force. Absolutely incorrect! Acceleration is the rate of change of VELOCITY. Again, do you know what velocity is? If you choose to view the system as *net force only* (that is, to only state that the F=0, while ignoring the forces that make up F) then you are right, but you are also not doing very good physics, since you're ignoring the *real* situation. The reality of the situation is that when I'm standing on Earth my velocity towards the center of the Earth is ZERO, and will remain zero as long as my distance to the center of the Earth remains the same! So while you can think of things in terms of Fnet ONLY, you can't just jump back and forth from "what is it really there" assertion to "but I ignore what's really there and treat the total as a whole" assertion. If you go into details, you go into details, you can't just ignore whatever you feel like. I'm not ignoring anything, you are. You are ignoring the velocity. Well, you can, but that's trolling. Say it louder. I'm putting a lot of time and thought into my answers to you, trying to explain what physics really is, as opposed to what you seem to think it is. Ignoring whatever you want is not making your assertions any tru'er, and to be frank, it's quite rude. ~moo You are ignoring the velocity. You are ignoring what I am telling you about velocity, and the rate of change of the velocity (acceleration). Troll. Louder!!! Edited October 8, 2008 by traveler
mooeypoo Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 traveler, physics is not about opinion, physics is about rules and facts. I presented an explanation of those facts (along with other posters on the thread). You repeatedly ignored the explanations and presented the answers you disagreed with as if we haven't answered them at all. Repeating, or insisting on an error does not make it true. You can state and restate your own version of physics until you are blue in the face, and it will still not make gravity, acceleration, or the various affecting forces go away. If you want to know why, I suggest you go back to the thread that was closed (for a reason), look at what I wrote again, go to the three links I posted that speak of why gravity is acceleration, think of the visual examples I gave, and try to see if, still, you have no answer. Note, please: You should check to see if you have no answer, not if you dislike physics. Disliking physics does not make physics false. There aer also rules to this forum, you should go over them. Trolling is against the rules. Nitpicking answers is against the rules. Reopening a closed thread is, too, against the rules. ~moo P.S: I didn't yell, scream, or post my answers in huge fonts. You changed them to appear as if I did. when I made any visual changes to your replies, if at all, I wrote that the changes were my doing, and there was a purpose to them (for example, bolding something you said so I can relate to it). Changing the style and tone of what I wrote just so you can act as the martyr in this issue is not only against the rules, it's also rude, insensitive, and quite much a lie. I suggest that you go and read the rules of the forum you chose to post in, again, and make sure you follow them.
YT2095 Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 if a staff member closes a thread, it Stays Closed, and is NOT to be restarted elsewhere! Thread Closed.
Recommended Posts