Kinetic to heat (building a spaceship)
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Big Bang is a amorphous, a nonentity, process whereas Atom Totality is a "something that is building" Chapt 3 #153; ATOM TOTALITY
Next: Serpent Mound. Ohio. Part 2.
From: gb on 17 Jun 2010 14:08 > > > Do you think momentum is mysteriously lost every time the cops test > > > a gun this way? > > > Well, I have a theory here... > > Yes, I already know that. I asked you a specific question about a > situation it predicts will have a specific result, the "mysterious > loss" of momentum. Do you have an answer? > > > One can see covered water bubbles in space... > > Please stick with one illustrative example at a time. > > I ask again; do you think momentum is mysteriously lost every time > the cops test a gun as I described, yes or no? That's what I said, that's what I think happens. Or you need to hear me say that word starting with y.
From: gb on 17 Jun 2010 14:17 > > Heat is not kinetic energy. > > > I looked up kinetic energy, you confused me on that. I defined it > > properly originally as I started this thread, kinetic to heat. > > What definition did you find that denies that heat is kinetic > energy? Wikipedia: "The kinetic energy of an object is the extra energy which it possesses due to its motion. It is defined as the work needed to accelerate a body of a given mass from rest to its current velocity. Having gained this energy during its acceleration, the body maintains this kinetic energy unless its speed changes. Negative work of the same magnitude would be required to return the body to a state of rest from that velocity." This example to me refers to as science of objects moving in space. The kinetic energy is the working energy with such objects, rocket science, etc. It relates to modulation of speed of an object.
From: gb on 17 Jun 2010 14:21 On Jun 17, 11:04 am, gb <gb6...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jun 15, 1:12 pm, jbriggs444 <jbriggs...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 15, 2:24 pm, gb <gb6...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 13, 6:18 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On 6/13/10 5:01 PM, gb wrote: > > > > > > Can impact into a bag filled with > > > > > sand absorb the impact into vibrations, where the sandbag itself would > > > > > move with less energy after the hit because some energy is lost, > > > > > absorbed? Do water bags colliding absorb energy of impact? My only > > > > > experiment revolves around five pool table balls hanging in line and > > > > > hitting the first one moves the last one. Can we make energy absorbed > > > > > so the last one moves just a little, then place these absorbing balls > > > > > to the bottom of the spaceship? > > > > > Get some water balloons, go to the sandy beach, do some experiments, > > > > write down the experimental setup, record the data and experimental > > > > error and draw conclusions. Apply mathematical analysis. Write this > > > > all down in a lab notebook and get back to us. > > > > It should be interesting that hanging five pool table balls and > > > hitting the first one in the line sends the last one up. Yet this > > > momentum transferred through the balls does not apply with sand balls > > > where sand crystal vibrations remove this momentum of impact. > > > > The problem belongs to physicists to solve. > > > Where are the experimental results, the error analysis and the lab > > notebooks? In the absence of data, there is no problem to solve. > > > In particular, what was the total momentum of the sand balls > > before and after impact? We don't want idle speculation about > > sand crystal vibrations. We want a reproducible experiment > > showing a failure of momentum conservation in an appropriately > > closed system. > > > If you have one, we've got a Nobel prize nomination waiting. > This idea was more understood by most than I expected when I came here. But more so, when I came here, I was hoping somebody might know what materials might absorb impact momentum and weaken it, be it through vibrations or heat. But at least the question and theory seems to be understood, which was a breakthrough.
From: jimp on 17 Jun 2010 14:32 In sci.physics gb <gb6726(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jun 15, 4:27 pm, Uncle Ben <b...(a)greenba.com> wrote: >> On Jun 15, 2:21 pm, gb <gb6...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> > > > Now I take away momentum, in that sense of 'internally lost energy of >> > > > momentum'. >> >> > > You have missed a very fundamental finding in physics. Momentum >> > > is always conserved! There is no "internally lost energy of momentum" >> >> > > You appear not to know the differences between the concepts of >> > > momentum, energy and thermodynamics. Easily remedied with a freshman >> > > level physics textbook. Google is your friend. >> >> > Can impact momentum (from an object) into a sandbag evaporate energy >> > by scattering that energy in all direction between resonating sand >> > crystals? >> >> > Never mind. >> >> Kinetic energy can change to heat energy, but there no way to lose >> momentum in a sandbag free to move on impact of a bullrt. > > So sand crystals don't swallow up energy by vibrating. Gibberish. > The way I see it is punching a sandbag in the gym. It does not swing > much because maybe it absorbs a lot of the energy. That's because you have no clue about energy, momentum, velocity, their relationship, or how to calculate them. > Is there a good absorbant better than sand? (asking it in general from > others, if somebody knows it) Gibberish. As far as gym bags go, they contain something that gives, like sand, instead of something hard so people won't hurt themselves hitting them. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply.
From: Androcles on 17 Jun 2010 15:00
"gb" <gb6726(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:7d99c99b-0251-4a64-810c-e6f0ff62b780(a)z15g2000prh.googlegroups.com... On Jun 17, 11:04 am, gb <gb6...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jun 15, 1:12 pm, jbriggs444 <jbriggs...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 15, 2:24 pm, gb <gb6...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 13, 6:18 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On 6/13/10 5:01 PM, gb wrote: > > > > > > Can impact into a bag filled with > > > > > sand absorb the impact into vibrations, where the sandbag itself > > > > > would > > > > > move with less energy after the hit because some energy is lost, > > > > > absorbed? Do water bags colliding absorb energy of impact? My only > > > > > experiment revolves around five pool table balls hanging in line > > > > > and > > > > > hitting the first one moves the last one. Can we make energy > > > > > absorbed > > > > > so the last one moves just a little, then place these absorbing > > > > > balls > > > > > to the bottom of the spaceship? > > > > > Get some water balloons, go to the sandy beach, do some experiments, > > > > write down the experimental setup, record the data and experimental > > > > error and draw conclusions. Apply mathematical analysis. Write this > > > > all down in a lab notebook and get back to us. > > > > It should be interesting that hanging five pool table balls and > > > hitting the first one in the line sends the last one up. Yet this > > > momentum transferred through the balls does not apply with sand balls > > > where sand crystal vibrations remove this momentum of impact. > > > > The problem belongs to physicists to solve. > > > Where are the experimental results, the error analysis and the lab > > notebooks? In the absence of data, there is no problem to solve. > > > In particular, what was the total momentum of the sand balls > > before and after impact? We don't want idle speculation about > > sand crystal vibrations. We want a reproducible experiment > > showing a failure of momentum conservation in an appropriately > > closed system. > > > If you have one, we've got a Nobel prize nomination waiting. > This idea was more understood by most than I expected when I came here. But more so, when I came here, I was hoping somebody might know what materials might absorb impact momentum and weaken it, be it through vibrations or heat. But at least the question and theory seems to be understood, which was a breakthrough. ========================================== Car tyres get hot when constantly flexed, ask any Formula 1 race enthusiast. Impacts distort. If you want to try it on steel, bend a wire shirt hanger back and forth to break it. Be careful not to scorch your fingers. You have been warned. |