If gravity and acceleration are equivalent the strength of gravity is limited
in [Math]
|
Prev: What are space, and time for BP's cap&trade nostrum (circa Waxman's '91 bill on acid rain)
Next: turning probability combinations and permutations into geometrical concepts #4.20 & #236 Correcting Math & Atom Totality
From: BURT on 27 Jul 2010 15:52 On Jul 27, 6:50 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > On Jul 26, 4:16 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > On Jul 26, 6:52 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > On Jul 26, 12:01 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > If there is an acceleration limit below the speed of light > > > > There's not, so you're doa right there. > > > Light doesn't slow from C while leaving gravity therefore it doesn't > > have an escape velocity like matter does. > > > Mitch Raemsch > > That's totally nonsensical, but even so, how would that limit > acceleration? If there is a light speed acceleration energy reaches light speed and that violates the SR motion law. Clearly there is no light speed acceleration. The possibility for new accceleration goes down as you approach the speed of light. Mitch Raemsch
From: Jonathan Doolin on 27 Jul 2010 21:02 On Jul 27, 2:52 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jul 27, 6:50 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 26, 4:16 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Jul 26, 6:52 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 26, 12:01 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > If there is an acceleration limit below the speed of light > > > > > There's not, so you're doa right there. > > > > Light doesn't slow from C while leaving gravity therefore it doesn't > > > have an escape velocity like matter does. > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > That's totally nonsensical, but even so, how would that limit > > acceleration? > > If there is a light speed acceleration energy reaches light speed and > that violates the SR motion law. Clearly there is no light speed > acceleration. The possibility for new accceleration goes down as you > approach the speed of light. > > Mitch Raemsch There's two ways of thinking of acceleration. The standard way to think of it is as the differential change in velocity over a differential change in time. So you can always break down any particular change in velocity as several smaller changes in velocity. If for instance, somehow a particle were to accelerate by .9c in a hundredth of a second, and then accelerate by .9c in the next hundredth of a second, and continue doing this for a whole second, it would seem like the acceleration must be 90 c in one second. But you're overlooking of course, that velocity is not additive. You use the velocity-addition-rule. ...or you think in terms of rapidity changes, and then you can just add normally. Another way of thinking of acceleration is as an instantaneous event. An instantaneous change in velocity. I'm not exactly sure whether such a thing exists or not, but one could say there is no way for any instantaneous change in velocity to result in a change greater than the speed of light. True, but in this case, also, it is probably better to think in terms of rapidity. Though there is a maximum instantaneous change in velocity, there is NO maximum instantaneous change in rapidity. Of course, I am speaking here of a theoretical point particle. If the object under acceleration has any size to it at all, there would probably structural issues, and it could be crushed by certain levels of acceleration. Well, that's my two cents, anyway. Jonathan Doolin
From: BURT on 27 Jul 2010 21:36 On Jul 27, 6:02 pm, Jonathan Doolin <good4us...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 27, 2:52 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 27, 6:50 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > On Jul 26, 4:16 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 26, 6:52 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jul 26, 12:01 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > If there is an acceleration limit below the speed of light > > > > > > There's not, so you're doa right there. > > > > > Light doesn't slow from C while leaving gravity therefore it doesn't > > > > have an escape velocity like matter does. > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > That's totally nonsensical, but even so, how would that limit > > > acceleration? > > > If there is a light speed acceleration energy reaches light speed and > > that violates the SR motion law. Clearly there is no light speed > > acceleration. The possibility for new accceleration goes down as you > > approach the speed of light. > > > Mitch Raemsch > > There's two ways of thinking of acceleration. The standard way to > think of it is as the differential change in velocity over a > differential change in time. So you can always break down any > particular change in velocity as several smaller changes in velocity. > If for instance, somehow a particle were to accelerate by .9c in a > hundredth of a second, and then accelerate by .9c in the next > hundredth of a second, and continue doing this for a whole second, it > would seem like the acceleration must be 90 c in one second. But > you're overlooking of course, that velocity is not additive. You use > the velocity-addition-rule. ...or you think in terms of rapidity > changes, and then you can just add normally. > > Another way of thinking of acceleration is as an instantaneous event. > An instantaneous change in velocity. I'm not exactly sure whether > such a thing exists or not, but one could say there is no way for any > instantaneous change in velocity to result in a change greater than > the speed of light. True, but in this case, also, it is probably > better to think in terms of rapidity. Though there is a maximum > instantaneous change in velocity, there is NO maximum instantaneous > change in rapidity. > > Of course, I am speaking here of a theoretical point particle. If the > object under acceleration has any size to it at all, there would > probably structural issues, and it could be crushed by certain levels > of acceleration. > > Well, that's my two cents, anyway. > > Jonathan Doolin- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - If you accelerate energy - as in a space ship - energy's time flow goes slower. There are Two times. When one slows the two as a whole flow slows down for energy. The two times are one from gravity which is in space and the other from motion of matterial through space. The two rates combine as a whole to flow as one rate over matter as it moves in the gravitational field. This is gravity time and motion time together flowing. Mitch Raemsch
From: Igor on 28 Jul 2010 09:54 On Jul 27, 3:52 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jul 27, 6:50 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 26, 4:16 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Jul 26, 6:52 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 26, 12:01 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > If there is an acceleration limit below the speed of light > > > > > There's not, so you're doa right there. > > > > Light doesn't slow from C while leaving gravity therefore it doesn't > > > have an escape velocity like matter does. > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > That's totally nonsensical, but even so, how would that limit > > acceleration? > > If there is a light speed acceleration energy reaches light speed and > that violates the SR motion law. Clearly there is no light speed > acceleration. The possibility for new accceleration goes down as you > approach the speed of light. > That's about as clear as the mud your mind has been wallowing in ever since you've been posting to usenet.
From: BURT on 28 Jul 2010 17:35
On Jul 28, 6:54 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > On Jul 27, 3:52 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 27, 6:50 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > On Jul 26, 4:16 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 26, 6:52 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jul 26, 12:01 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > If there is an acceleration limit below the speed of light > > > > > > There's not, so you're doa right there. > > > > > Light doesn't slow from C while leaving gravity therefore it doesn't > > > > have an escape velocity like matter does. > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > That's totally nonsensical, but even so, how would that limit > > > acceleration? > > > If there is a light speed acceleration energy reaches light speed and > > that violates the SR motion law. Clearly there is no light speed > > acceleration. The possibility for new accceleration goes down as you > > approach the speed of light. > > That's about as clear as the mud your mind has been wallowing in ever > since you've been posting to usenet.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - It is clear that if you have a speed limit you have a change of speed limit and weight enforces it. Mitch Raemsch |