Specialized Gravitic Effect (split from Unknowns Making Meaningful Contributions)

[SplitInfinity]

That I think can happen in mathematics when ideas and tools from one branch can be applied to another branch. In fact I would say that quite a lot of the important results in mathematics are of this kind.

The trouble is that you need to be exposed to a lot of things to get a chance to see these links, that is where regular attendence of seminars and conferences comes in. Something that true outsiders will lack.Do we have any good examples of problems being solved on this forum?

Good Question!

 

I will have to look a bit and get back to you on that.

 

There is a lot of theoretical concepts that would seem to solve many big picture issues...but the math has not been presented to provide a proof or solve.

 

Split Infinity

[ajb]

There is a lot of theoretical concepts that would seem to solve many big picture issues...but the math has not been presented to provide a proof or solve.

Don't theoretical concepts need mathematics to even be stated?

[SplitInfinity]

Don't theoretical concepts need mathematics to even be stated?

OK...let's look at that.

 

I have a Theory specific to SR and GR. and the MATH is not required to see the issue.

 

If you have a containment field that will repel anything and in this let's say...1000 feet in diameter Sphere...there is 100,000 wooden balls that are all of equal mass as well as perfect spheres 1 inch in diameter.

 

All these balls are in a state of motion at 10 feet per second. This Containment Sphere is in Intergalactic Space and is moving at the same rate of Universal Expansion the surrounding Galaxies are.

 

Now Gravity is the created effect that exists by Matter and as we have been told...after the Big Bang...the particles of Energy and Mass that were in motion eventually coalesced into Stars, Planets and Galaxies. The thing is...there is a problem as far as Particles of mass in motion...gravity based grouping or gathering...and Kinetic Transfer.

 

I postulate that there exists....SGE or Specialized Gravitic Effect.

 

Now all these wooden balls in this 1000 feet in diameter containment sphere all in motion at a rate of 10 feet per second...should continue to bounce off each other and the sides of the containment field due to Kinetic Energy Transfer....FOREVER.

 

But they don't...because of Gravity...they will eventually coalesce...but even with Gravity...the velocity of the balls and the Kinetic Energy Transfer should not allow these balls to coalesce.

 

Thus I postulate that at the center point of Mass of any particle or object or objects where in lies a Gravity Well...such particles or objects of mass encountering or creating a Gravity Well encounter an ENTROPIC STATE OF KINETIC ENERGY TRANSFER.

 

If SGE did not exist...and everything points to it existing...the particles of mass after the Big Bang would continue to bounce off one another FOREVER due to Kinetic Transfer and thus they would never coalesce. The same with the wooden balls in the containment sphere....without SGE...they would continue to bounce off the containment field and each other forever due to Kinetic Energy Transfer...but they won't...as SGE will cause an Entropic Effect upon their Potential Kinetic Energy state and slow them down to collect.

 

Now...see...no math.

 

Split Infinity

[ajb]

I have a Theory specific to SR and GR. and the MATH is not required to see the issue.

No, at best you can have an intrepretation of some aspect of a theory like SR of GR. A physical theory by definition is a mathematical construct that can be used to model aspects of the Universe. You maybe able to explain some aspects using interpretations, but this can not be a replacement of the mathematics.

 

Anyway, we should take care not to get too much off topic. Though maybe your comments highlight some of the issues with "outsiders" making contributions.

[SplitInfinity]

No, at best you can have an intrepretation of some aspect of a theory like SR of GR. A physical theory by definition is a mathematical construct that can be used to model aspects of the Universe. You maybe able to explain some aspects using interpretations, but this can not be a replacement of the mathematics.

 

Anyway, we should take care not to get too much off topic. Though maybe your comments highlight some of the issues with "outsiders" making contributions.

 

The question directed to me by you and I quote..."Don't theoretical concepts need mathematics to even be stated?"....is not asking me to prove by way of Mathematics a Theory...it is asking if Math is needed just for a person to even STATE a theory.

 

By the parameters of your question and by the specifics of my answer I have answered your question and the answer is correctly...NO.

 

Split Infinity

[swansont]

In stating your hypothesis, you have used some maths, even if you don't write down any equations. For example, you have discussed conservation of energy, which is an equality. Math.

 

Further, had you been more specific in your analysis — using math— you would find that the situation you describe is impossible. The balls cannot be "all in motion at a rate of 10 feet per second" except as an initial condition, and you ignore that the balls will undergo inelastic collisions and also radiate, reducing their kinetic energy.

 

SGE is nothing new, and where it is correct, merely a restatement of standard physics.

[SplitInfinity]

In stating your hypothesis, you have used some maths, even if you don't write down any equations. For example, you have discussed conservation of energy, which is an equality. Math.

 

Further, had you been more specific in your analysis — using math— you would find that the situation you describe is impossible. The balls cannot be "all in motion at a rate of 10 feet per second" except as an initial condition, and you ignore that the balls will undergo inelastic collisions and also radiate, reducing their kinetic energy.

 

SGE is nothing new, and where it is correct, merely a restatement of standard physics.

Swany...the initial Potential Kinetic Force X 100,000 Wooden Balls= F. F equally the total amount of Kinetic Energy before any of the balls encounters any other ball or the Containment Field. Regardless that some balls will transfer or receive more Kinetic Energy than others to to strike vectors and multiple ball involvement....as well as oscillation of balls...the total of F would ALWAYS be F if Gravity did not exist and in particular SGE as the micro-moments of Multiple Ball Created by contact...Gravity Wells...will not create enough Space/Time Warpeture to coalesce all 100,000 balls without SGE.

 

Now as far as your statement about the math...I can see what you are getting at and it is true...but let's look at this quoted sentence from ajb..." A physical theory by definition is a mathematical construct that can be used to model aspects of the Universe."...end of quote.

 

This statement that I quoted from his post is incorrect. A PHYSICAL THEORY....a physical theory could be specific to how a person should talk and act during a speech as such a theory could detail all the aspects of...if you talk this way and bring up this and not say that....THEN....doing so will give a person the ability to convey an idea to a much greater extent than if the person did ...THAT...instead.

 

Using what I quoted from ajb there are multitudes of PHYSICAL THEORIES which would absolutely have no necessity for any use or equations of Mathematics. Now that doesn't mean such theories could be...by a smart enough person...have their stated does and don't and styles and actions broken down into a Mathematical Formula or Equation....but the reality is FOR SUCH THEORIES TO EXIST THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO NECESSITY FOR MATHEMATICS TO BE INCLUDED OR A PART OF THE REALITY OR DEVELOPMENT OF SUCH THEORIES.

 

Let me ask you this? Little Ol' Lady Smithe has a THEORY which states that every time she wears short skirts while she is outside standing on a foot stool watering her hanging plants....Old Doc Johnson...who lives across the street opposite her home will make conversation and walk across the street. On the days she is wearing pants or long skirts....Old Doc Johnson will just stay put and quiet. She Theorizes that Old Doc Johnson still has LEAD IN HIS PENCIL!

 

Now unless we are going to be using MATH to measure the length of Old Doc Johnson's Pencil or take other data into consideration...I believe I have just posted Ol' Lady Smithe's Theory and I do not believe that her theory requires any Mathematical Representation or Equation or Formula to be listed along with what I just typed to make her theory VALID as to call it a THEORY.

 

I have another theory...and I will be as quick as I can. Most people are either Left or Right Brain Hemisphere Dominant. Left side being equated with Analytical Thinking and Right Side...Creative Thinking. Now there are some people who use BOTH HEMISPHERES and SOME of such people are MUSICIANS and for those who don't know I am a signed, touring musician who was very big in the 80's and still viable and touring...I will be going back on tour in a few weeks...and because of my Left/Right Brain Hemisphere interconnectivity I am good in music and other fields of art such as sculpture, painting on all mediums, drawing, design...as this comes from my RIGHT Hemisphere and from my LEFT I am good in Logic, Science, Math, Physics...etc...and here is a LINK that talks about such things....http://laurierileymusic.wordpress.com/2012/09/23/the-right-brain-the-left-brain-and-the-musician/

 

As well...Musicians have a higher than average I.Q...LINK...http://news.vanderbilt.edu/2008/10/musicians-use-both-sides-of-their-brains-more-frequently-than-average-people-65577/

.

Now because I use both Left and Right Brain Hemispheres...specifically in the left and right frontal cortex...I not only have a greater ability to use either Creative Association to expound upon a Analytical Based Concept or Reality or use Analytical based association to expound upon a Creative Based Concept or Reality. I can also Pat my Head and Rub my Stomach...LOL!

 

I am Ambidextrous as well and because of my Left/Right Hemisphere Connectivity....I have a far greater ability than the average person to access my Subconscious Minds stored Data. The Subconscious is like a Recording Computer and stores all data that my senses have taken in. If a person is walking on the beach and there is a girl reading a book and this person is with his WIFE so he does not look at the girl at all but his peripheral vision can see the book pages and all that is written upon them even though this guy does not even consciously look at it or even KNOW that he is seeing it out of the corner of his eye...but the subconscious knows and records this data as well as every aspect that all the rest of his senses are picking up...the smell of the ocean...the feel of the sand between his toes...the squawking of Sea Gulls...the taste of the salt in the air...and the subconscious even records what this guy is thinking at the moment and in his case it would be...GOD! This girl is HOT! Don't look at her butt you moron the old lady will KILL YOU!

 

So after all that my point is...ajb...is a smart cookie. He is VERY Left Brain Dominant as he is an analytical thinker as well as if you look at his Members Information you will see he say's he is an Assistant Professor. The difference between ajb and myself is to what extent our brains are HARDWIRED to see things in a certain light.

 

Because ajb is Left Hemisphere Dominant...he will instinctively analyze data a certain way specific to his Left Brain Hemisphere Dominance. For ME...I am hardwired to use BOTH Hemispheres as my Subconscious takes in all sensory data and disseminates it equally or close to equal to both Left and Right sides...and ajb's subconscious is also disseminates his sensory data to his brains hemispheres but in his case the LEFT HEMISPHERE and Prefrontal Cortex will receive a greater amount of data than the Right side. At this point for BOTH OF US....the Left and Right sides start FIGHTING FOR DOMINANCE and the right to control the ability to formulate an overall examination of the data as well as control what side will the data based response come from.

 

ajb's mind being Left Hemisphere and Left Prefrontal Cortex Dominant will examine concepts and formulate ideas and theories based upon his HARDWIRING that is Analytical in it's nature. For ME...having Left and Right Hemisphere/Cortex data dissemination by the Subconscious as well as assimilation by the Conscious Left and Right sides...I am HARDWIRED...to understand, observe, calculate, theorize and formulate....any and all such data in a Creative Analyzation of such data as well as Analyze Creatively such data.

 

So as this all pertains to this topic...ajb say's to me..."Don't theoretical concepts need mathematics to even be stated? ajb is HARDWIRED to look at it as such. He counters my...NO...answer with..." A physical theory by definition is a mathematical construct that can be used to model aspects of the Universe."

 

Because of the way he is HARDWIRED...it never even occurs to him that there are many Theories which are considered...PHYSICAL THEORIES...that have absolutely no need to state any Mathematical Equations or Formulas or even associations for these theories to be considered a THEORY.

 

It is not that ajb is WRONG....it is just that what he is saying is not RIGHT all the time. He has posted in the manner that his HARDWIRING of his brain that is...LEFT BRAIN HEMISPHERE AND LEFT PREFRONTAL CORTEX DOMINANCE.

 

The way I am HARDWIRED...it allows me a great deal more Flexibility as well as I am not so constrained as ajb...still...ajb's ability to be so focused upon anything analytical in it's nature allows him greater clarity upon such specific individual topics that I will NEVER be able to see as clearly. And this is why he is a Professorial Assistant. in PHYSICS.

 

Me...because I cannot see ANYTHING in either BLACK OR WHITE as everything to me is shades of GREY....things can sometimes get confusing as I can apply multiple values and multiple definitions and multiple reasoning upon just about ANYTHING.

 

I guess that is why certain U.S. Military and U.S. CIVILIAN GROUPS recruited me so heavily in my JR. Year of High School after I scored some ridiculously high number on the then mandatory I.Q. Tests and Aptitude and Psych Tests....of which the last showed I had a certain....Moral Flexibility.

 

So I guess for me...ANYTHING GOES.

 

Split Infinity

 

 

 

[ajb]

In stating your hypothesis, you have used some maths, even if you don't write down any equations. For example, you have discussed conservation of energy, which is an equality. Math.

Concepts like field and energy are in the description, all of which are really mathematical constructs. The maths is hidden in the words, and without the mathematics explicitly it is hard to further develop ideas.

 

This statement that I quoted from his post is incorrect. A PHYSICAL THEORY....a physical theory could be specific to how a person should talk and act during a speech as such a theory could detail all the aspects of...if you talk this way and bring up this and not say that....THEN....doing so will give a person the ability to convey an idea to a much greater extent than if the person did ...THAT...instead.

The usual understanding of a physical theory will be a mathematical model of nature. You can use other understandings if you like, but that will not be what scientists are using.

Using what I quoted from ajb there are multitudes of PHYSICAL THEORIES which would absolutely have no necessity for any use or equations of Mathematics. Now that doesn't mean such theories could be...by a smart enough person...have their stated does and don't and styles and actions broken down into a Mathematical Formula or Equation....but the reality is FOR SUCH THEORIES TO EXIST THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO NECESSITY FOR MATHEMATICS TO BE INCLUDED OR A PART OF THE REALITY OR DEVELOPMENT OF SUCH THEORIES.

Mathematics has proved to be the right language for describing and studying physics. I don't see how anyone could suggest otherwise.

Let me ask you this? Little Ol' Lady Smithe has a THEORY which states that every time she wears short skirts while she is outside standing on a foot stool watering her hanging plants....Old Doc Johnson...who lives across the street opposite her home will make conversation and walk across the street. On the days she is wearing pants or long skirts....Old Doc Johnson will just stay put and quiet. She Theorizes that Old Doc Johnson still has LEAD IN HIS PENCIL!

 

 

Now unless we are going to be using MATH to measure the length of Old Doc Johnson's Pencil or take other data into consideration...I believe I have just posted Ol' Lady Smithe's Theory and I do not believe that her theory requires any Mathematical Representation or Equation or Formula to be listed along with what I just typed to make her theory VALID as to call it a THEORY.

Well, this is not usually the kind of problems I study. However, to prove that Ol' Lady Smithe's hypotheis is correct, or at least to provide some supporting evidence she should perfom experiments and keep proper records and then use statistical analysis to show there is such a correlation.

 

In fact she has does this, even if she does not realise it. She has used mathematics to reason that there is some correlation.

The difference between ajb and myself is to what extent our brains are HARDWIRED to see things in a certain light.

This may well be true.

Because ajb is Left Hemisphere Dominant...

Do we actually know that? I have not been tested in anyway.

ajb's mind being Left Hemisphere and Left Prefrontal Cortex Dominant will examine concepts and formulate ideas and theories based upon his HARDWIRING that is Analytical in it's nature. For ME...having Left and Right Hemisphere/Cortex data dissemination by the Subconscious as well as assimilation by the Conscious Left and Right sides...I am HARDWIRED...to understand, observe, calculate, theorize and formulate....any and all such data in a Creative Analyzation of such data as well as Analyze Creatively such data.

But what has this got to do with the fact, or not, that mathematics is needed in the physical sciences?

So as this all pertains to this topic...ajb say's to me..."Don't theoretical concepts need mathematics to even be stated? ajb is HARDWIRED to look at it as such. He counters my...NO...answer with..." A physical theory by definition is a mathematical construct that can be used to model aspects of the Universe."

Okay, but still you have not really convinced me that one can make very precise and useful statments about nature without mathematics. With your opening example, you have hidden mathematical concepts in the background. To see if your ideas are at least consistent you should preform the calculations.

Because of the way he is HARDWIRED...it never even occurs to him that there are many Theories which are considered...PHYSICAL THEORIES...that have absolutely no need to state any Mathematical Equations or Formulas or even associations for these theories to be considered a THEORY.

I have never seen such a thing, and almost by definition I never will.

 

Point to me one "non-mathematical physical theory" that is generall accepted by the mainstream and has been of some use.

It is not that ajb is WRONG....it is just that what he is saying is not RIGHT all the time.

Of course I am not right all of the time. There are gaps in my knowledge and I am quite capable of misunderstanding something. We all are, and indeed I have never claimed to be 100% right 100% of the time. No-one here will say they have never been wrong.

 

Part of science is knowing to change your point of view when the evidence become avaliable.

The way I am HARDWIRED...it allows me a great deal more Flexibility as well as I am not so constrained as ajb...still...ajb's ability to be so focused upon anything analytical in it's nature allows him greater clarity upon such specific individual topics that I will NEVER be able to see as clearly. And this is why he is a Professorial Assistant. in PHYSICS.

Mathematics frees your mind and allows you to make precice statements.

--------------------------------------------------------

 

Anyway this tread seems to have become a diagonistic of myself and SplitInfinity. I am not sure that this has been particularly useful.

[SplitInfinity]

Concepts like field and energy are in the description, all of which are really mathematical constructs. The maths is hidden in the words, and without the mathematics explicitly it is hard to further develop ideas.

 

The usual understanding of a physical theory will be a mathematical model of nature. You can use other understandings if you like, but that will not be what scientists are using.Mathematics has proved to be the right language for describing and studying physics. I don't see how anyone could suggest otherwise.Well, this is not usually the kind of problems I study. However, to prove that Ol' Lady Smithe's hypotheis is correct, or at least to provide some supporting evidence she should perfom experiments and keep proper records and then use statistical analysis to show there is such a correlation.

 

In fact she has does this, even if she does not realise it. She has used mathematics to reason that there is some correlation.This may well be true. Do we actually know that? I have not been tested in anyway.But what has this got to do with the fact, or not, that mathematics is needed in the physical sciences?Okay, but still you have not really convinced me that one can make very precise and useful statments about nature without mathematics. With your opening example, you have hidden mathematical concepts in the background. To see if your ideas are at least consistent you should preform the calculations.

I have never seen such a thing, and almost by definition I never will.

 

Point to me one "non-mathematical physical theory" that is generall accepted by the mainstream and has been of some use.Of course I am not right all of the time. There are gaps in my knowledge and I am quite capable of misunderstanding something. We all are, and indeed I have never claimed to be 100% right 100% of the time. No-one here will say they have never been wrong.

 

Part of science is knowing to change your point of view when the evidence become avaliable.Mathematics frees your mind and allows you to make precice statements.

--------------------------------------------------------

 

Anyway this tread seems to have become a diagonistic of myself and SplitInfinity. I am not sure that this has been particularly useful.

 

ajb...I would just like you to know I have enjoyed this debate and I hope you do not take what I am about to say next as if it is a SLIGHT or INSULT as it is NOT. It simply is what it is.

 

ajb...after reading all your specific replies to specific parts of my post I must say that....in your doing so as well as how you replied you were able to shed a greater light upon the concepts I was trying to get across to the membership than I ever could in what I posted.

 

At every single reply you gave to each of your chosen parts of my statement...whether they agreed with what I posted within that part of the entire post or if they disagreed....you demonstrated to the point of perfect clarity EXACTLY how your mind thinks and what you placed a high or higher value upon as well as even to a degree allowed all to see both your analytical clarity of thought as well as your complete and total blindness to some concepts and statements due to your reality of thought which is built upon how your Subconscious Disseminates sensory data to your Left Brain Hemisphere and Prefrontal Cortex at a much greater ratio than the amount of data being sent to your Right Brain Hemisphere and Prefrontal Cortex.

 

This is the way you are...you equate the Value of things using a strictly Mathematical Plus or Minus system and for things that you are not Hardwired to see such a value based upon this system....the minuses start adding up in an exponential way.

 

Your last sentence sums it up as far as what I am stating as and I quote..."Anyway this tread seems to have become a diagonistic of myself and SplitInfinity. I am not sure that this has been particularly useful."

 

The purpose of this was not to be some DIAGNOSTIC between you and I but I am very well aware of why you would view it as such....the purpose was to demonstrate 2 specific issues...one of which was an issue of the original topic from which I was attempting to show how an UNKNOWN could present a Theory that did not need to present MATH in order to be a Theory that can easily present a concept to others and be easily understood and viable.

 

The second issue was specific to this new created topic as I presented another Theory that was by design a way to convey possible understanding to you and others of the same mindset as you...that although I believe it is possible to break down just about everything or anything into a Mathematical Equation or Representation....depending upon what a Theory might be specific to as well as what issues such a Theory might be attempting to resolve, prove or bring to light...Complete and Strict Analytical based Thinking and Observation will not always be the best method to either postulate or be the best method to obtain an understanding.

 

To use ONLY such a method may and will not only hinder ones ability to postulate but can also hinder the ability of others to find benefit or enlightenment from such a theory due to the built in constraints created by an inability to see or an inability to create the necessary mechanisms allowing a proper transfer of knowledge or concepts.

 

Split Infinity

Edited May 27, 2013 by SplitInfinity

[ajb]

To use ONLY such a method may and will not only hinder ones ability to postulate but can also hinder the ability of others to find benefit or enlightenment from such a theory due to the built in constraints created by an inability to see or an inability to create the necessary mechanisms allowing a proper transfer of knowledge or concepts.

In my opinion the opposite is actually the case. Using a mathematical framwork allows one to make precise statments and allows the proper transer of knwoledge. That must be one of the reasons that mathematics has been so useful to mankind.

[SplitInfinity]

In my opinion the opposite is actually the case. Using a mathematical framwork allows one to make precise statments and allows the proper transer of knwoledge. That must be one of the reasons that mathematics has been so useful to mankind.

 

ajb....even as I was posting what you quoted...I KNEW....you would either be thinking what you just posted or reply directly as such...LOL!

 

I am sure that you could have the same foresight about some things that I might say.

 

The thing here is that it IS NOT IMPORTANT for either of us to prove which way is the best way....what IS IMPORTANT is for both of us and anyone who is reading this to be MADE AWARE of such possibilities.

 

I am certain being a person who's mind is specific to Math....being able to know all conditions...all possibilities and all probabilities as well as the ENVIRONMENT....be it one of a Planetary Reality or whether it be an Environment of the MIND or a CONSTRUCT developed by such a mind....is what is really important if you are seeking the FACTS.

 

Split Infinity

[swansont]

Swany...the initial Potential Kinetic Force X 100,000 Wooden Balls= F. F equally the total amount of Kinetic Energy before any of the balls encounters any other ball or the Containment Field. Regardless that some balls will transfer or receive more Kinetic Energy than others to to strike vectors and multiple ball involvement....as well as oscillation of balls...the total of F would ALWAYS be F if Gravity did not exist and in particular SGE as the micro-moments of Multiple Ball Created by contact...Gravity Wells...will not create enough Space/Time Warpeture to coalesce all 100,000 balls without SGE.

 

It's swansont

 

F is not always F. F actually decreases in time, because the collisions are not elastic. Kinetic energy is not a conserved quantity, regardless of the presence of gravity.

[SplitInfinity]

It's swansont

 

F is not always F. F actually decreases in time, because the collisions are not elastic. Kinetic energy is not a conserved quantity, regardless of the presence of gravity.

 

swansont ehh? Now here I thought I was giving you a cool ESPN based Nick Name and you have to go all prim and proper on me and blow it out of the water! LOL!

 

OK...FINE...swansont...but SWANY sounds much cooler!

 

OK...here we go...Now I am aware that over time the 100,000 wooden balls that at one time were all in motion at a velocity of 10 feet per second within this Containment Sphere which has a diameter of 1000 feet and is moving along with Universal Expansion in Intergalactic Space.

 

So I know eventually these 100,000 wooden balls will coalesce and will become a sphere or close to it within this Containment Sphere...and just so you know...any wooden ball impacting the containment spheres inner walls will be repelled from the containment wall maintaining the same Potential Kinetic Energy repelling off it as it had going in. Such Kinetic energy need not be of the nature that would maintain identical velocity going in to the wall when coming off it...as oscillation and angular spin momentum can be taken into account but the balls will always retain the same Kinetic Energy coming off the wall as going in.

 

Now please restate your issue.

 

Split Infinity

[swansont]

So I know eventually these 100,000 wooden balls will coalesce and will become a sphere or close to it within this Containment Sphere...and just so you know...any wooden ball impacting the containment spheres inner walls will be repelled from the containment wall maintaining the same Potential Kinetic Energy repelling off it as it had going in.

And this is the problem. You "know" this, but it isn't true. You have described an elastic collision, and macroscopic objects do not undergo elastic collisions. (the only objects that do have no alternate ways of losing energy) The collisions are inelastic. You can hear them colliding — that requires sound, and a loss of KE. They will increase their temperature and radiate energy away.

[SplitInfinity]

 

And this is the problem. You "know" this, but it isn't true. You have described an elastic collision, and macroscopic objects do not undergo elastic collisions. (the only objects that do have no alternate ways of losing energy) The collisions are inelastic. You can hear them colliding — that requires sound, and a loss of KE. They will increase their temperature and radiate energy away.

 

An inelastic collision, in contrast to an elastic collision, is a collisionin which kinetic energy is not conserved.

As per WIKI...In collisions of macroscopic bodies, some kinetic energy is turned into vibrational energy of the atoms, causing a heating effect, and the bodies are deformed. Inelastic collisions may not conserve kinetic energy, but they do obey conservation of momentum.

Now this is the definition of the words and is a VERY INTELLIGENT basis as per it's use by you as far as attempting to show me and others here how the 100,000 Wooden Balls would over time lose their Kinetic Energy thus lose their initial velocity of 10 feet per second as well as how such collisions of Macroscopic Bodies will convert the created vibrational state into HEAT...thus Kinetic Energy would not be conserved.

Here is the thing...I specifically chose WOODEN BALLS as a way to provide any here capable...of guessing just WHAT the CONTAINMENT FIELD IS that is...as I have stated...repelling the balls and not allowing any lose of Kinetic Energy upon impact of the of the Containment Spheres interior walls.

I was a bit misleading with the words walls and impact but I was hoping to see if any here might be quick enough and BRIGHT enough to pick up on what the Nature of my Containment Sphere is....and a CLUE would be this following quoted paragraph from my own above post.......

"Now Gravity is the created effect that exists by Matter and as we have been told...after the Big Bang...the particles of Energy and Mass that were in motion eventually coalesced into Stars, Planets and Galaxies. The thing is...there is a problem as far as Particles of mass in motion...gravity based grouping or gathering...and Kinetic Transfer."

So Swansont...I will continue in a moment or two but before I continue....Would you like to venture a GUESS at what EXACTLY is the nature and what is the abilities and construct of my Spherical Containment Field?

Split Infinity