Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Corwin · 03-08-2002, 01:54 PM

Then let me clarify for the terminally anal-retentive: All of this matter is still subject to gravitational acceleration and the forces involved in said acceleration. That better?

graden1 · 03-08-2002, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Corwin:
Acceleration of gravity is still 9.8 m/s^2.

Doesn't matter if you're resisting it or being blocked or not, that acceleration is still there.

This just keeps getting better and better....

bluefugue · 03-08-2002, 01:58 PM

Quote:

That better?

Yes, and I will now withdraw again and let the more scientifically knowledgeable address that.

You say "terminologically anal-retentive" like it's a bad thing, but in fact it is an essential characteristic of doing science. I think one of the main reasons you are in disagreement with everyone here, is because you are using different definitions of terms. Confusion tends to result. Hence the flap over whether "force" and "energy" are interchangable. In common use they may be. In science, they absolutely are not.

[ March 08, 2002: Message edited by: IesusDomini ]

Deimos · 03-08-2002, 01:59 PM

Quote:

If an object is having energy put into it for acceleration, and being prevented from accelerating, (such as a car chained to a wall) the energy is still there, it's still being expended, it still has an effect. That simple enough for you?

Sweet Jesus, this is insane

Corwin, go back to elementary school. Unless the force undergoes a displacement it DOES NO WORK - NO ENERGY IS CONVERTED.

Right then, please answer this - If a 1 kg mass is sitting on a table, what is the rate of energy transfered to it from the gravitional field, hmmm?

Corwin · 03-08-2002, 01:59 PM

They are interchangeable within the paramaters we're dealing with here. Force is as much a form of energy as light is. The term is just as interchangeable.

Corwin · 03-08-2002, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Deimos:


Sweet Jesus, this is insane

Corwin, go back to elementary school. Unless the force undergoes a displacement it DOES NO WORK - NO ENERGY IS CONVERTED.

Right then, please answer this - If a 1 kg mass is sitting on a table, what is the rate of energy transfered to it from the gravitional field, hmmm?

9.8 kg/m/s^2.

F=MA.

(edited for the typo on the number for the aforementioned terminally anal-retentive.)

[ March 08, 2002: Message edited by: Corwin ]

Deimos · 03-08-2002, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Corwin:


9.8 kg/m/s^2.

F=MA.

(edited for the typo on the number for the aforementioned terminally anal-retentive.)

[ March 08, 2002: Message edited by: Corwin ]

Blink, Blink.

Is that supposed to be 9.8 watts?

tronvillain · 03-08-2002, 02:12 PM

Corwin:

Quote:

Fine tron.... try something for me.

Go find a battery (potential energy) that's been sitting there for about 5 years and use it.

What happens exactly?

Nothing. The potential energy has been lost, converted into other forms by known mechanisms. Contrast that with your case, where no energy appears to be lost and there is no mechanism!

Corwin · 03-08-2002, 02:12 PM

You want to convert that to watts? Be my guest.

Deimos · 03-08-2002, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Corwin:
You want to convert that to watts? Be my guest.

No I want YOU to answer the question.

A 1 kg mass is sitting on a table. What, according to the Corwin Mechanism, is the rate of energy transfered to it by the gravitional field. Answer to be quoted with units of J/s or W. No other BS accepted

[ March 08, 2002: Message edited by: Deimos ]

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-08-2002, 01:54 PM	#101
Corwin Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 4,369	Then let me clarify for the terminally anal-retentive: All of this matter is still subject to gravitational acceleration and the forces involved in said acceleration. That better?

03-08-2002, 01:59 PM	#105
Corwin Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 4,369	They are interchangeable within the paramaters we're dealing with here. Force is as much a form of energy as light is. The term is just as interchangeable.

03-08-2002, 02:12 PM	#109
Corwin Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 4,369	You want to convert that to watts? Be my guest.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.