Reaction-Action-Activities relationship?
in [Physics]
|
Prev: easy proof for rectangular-wedge tiler Re: the revised Maximum Tiler conjecture in 2D and 3D #522 Correcting Math
Next: Band GAP energy
From: Kumar on 20 Mar 2010 21:35 On Mar 20, 11:12 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 20, 6:00 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 20, 1:44 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mar 18, 11:29 pm, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 18, 6:36 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Mar 18, 5:28 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 18, 9:49 am, Saimhain Moose <samhainmo...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mar 18, 12:21 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Are activities not dependant on applied forces? > > > > > > > > Exactly what do you mean by "activities"? > > > > > > > Something done as an action or a movement. > > > > > > They're not the same. A movement (specifically a change in movement) > > > > > is the *response* to a force. The force is the cause, the acceleration > > > > > is the effect. Motion is not a cause. > > > > > What is the differance between acceleration & motion? > > > > Motion includes any change in position, which can be done at constant > > > velocity (for which the acceleration is zero) or with changing > > > velocity (for which the acceleration is nonzero).- > > > Let us see it with an example. Exiting of an electron by application > > of energy & its decaying back on emitting photons. Are both of these > > are motions & acceleration or just exiting is acceleration but its > > decaying back not? > > > Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > ------------------ > IMHO > photon emission can be > in both cases > (if your car collides with another car > a lot of 'thunder and lightnings' are created > !!(:-) > > Y.Porat > -------------------- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - How photons emmission can be possible on exciting state of electrons?
From: Kumar on 20 Mar 2010 21:37 On Mar 20, 11:17 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 20, 5:46 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 19, 5:06 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Are activities not dependant on applied forces? > > > > > > > > > Exactly what do you mean by "activities"? > > > > > > > > Something done as an action or a movement. > > > > > > > They're not the same. A movement (specifically a change in movement) > > > > > > is the *response* to a force. The force is the cause, the acceleration > > > > > > is the effect. Motion is not a cause. > > > > > > ------------------ > > > > > mass is motion- is a cause.-- > > > > > while it collides with something > > > > > > momentum as well is mass in motion > > > > > Y.P > > > > > --------------------- > > > > > Can it be there that application of energy to atoms causing > > > > excitation as action then they are decaying back releasing photons as > > > > reaction? > > > > ------------- > > > yes i t could be > > > but the problem is to make some > > > reasonable 'mechanism' > > > that will show it all along the way > > > > but in generally and abstractly i think you are right !! > > > Does it justify equal & opposite reaction to any action at basic or > > atleast atomic level level? Rest we can look thereafter. > > ----------------------- > yes > i think that at he bottom line > it is always > action = reaction > that is one of the basics of the physical world !! > > ATB > Y.Porat > ---------------------- > > > > > > > > btw have you ever heard about > > > the Bootstrap theory ?? > > > > it is in generally compared to the zoological world !! > > > in which each creature is eating the other one > > > and uses its flesh material to build its > > > ]own body !! > > > sorry the nasty comparison > > > I have not heard about it but it looks to be natural theory rather > > than social theory. > > > > but it i s not **my* invention > > > but in generally it is very compatible to my > > > world of mater and particle and EVEN ENERGY > > > world understanding > > > and that is why i always say > > > > ''No mass no real physics'' > > > even for energy and photons !!! > > > > what you suggested above > > > fits in a general way --that theory !!! > > > Thanks we can try to look it as a basic thought than we can try > > linking it at gross level. How this theory can be linked at > > complex( molecular, substances, things & beings) levels?- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - What about the involvement of gravitation force in equal & opposite consideration?
From: Kumar on 20 Mar 2010 21:45 On Mar 20, 7:49 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 19, 11:00 pm, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 20, 1:44 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mar 18, 11:29 pm, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 18, 6:36 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Mar 18, 5:28 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 18, 9:49 am, Saimhain Moose <samhainmo...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mar 18, 12:21 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Are activities not dependant on applied forces? > > > > > > > > Exactly what do you mean by "activities"? > > > > > > > Something done as an action or a movement. > > > > > > They're not the same. A movement (specifically a change in movement) > > > > > is the *response* to a force. The force is the cause, the acceleration > > > > > is the effect. Motion is not a cause. > > > > > What is the differance between acceleration & motion? > > > > Motion includes any change in position, which can be done at constant > > > velocity (for which the acceleration is zero) or with changing > > > velocity (for which the acceleration is nonzero).- > > > Let us see it with an example. Exiting of an electron by application > > of energy & its decaying back on emitting photons. Are both of these > > are motions & acceleration or just exiting is acceleration but its > > decaying back not? > > When an electron is emitted, the momentum transferred to the electron > is equal and opposite to the momentum transferred to the atom. > Likewise, when a photon is emitted, the same thing happens. Do you mean to say that applied energy/momentum to atom which caused excitation of its electrons is equal & opposite to energy released+ energy required for travelling of electrons/photons? > > > > > > Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: Kumar on 20 Mar 2010 21:46 On Mar 20, 7:51 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 19, 11:22 pm, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 20, 9:11 am, Saimhain Moose <samhainmo...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mar 19, 12:29 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 18, 6:36 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Mar 18, 5:28 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 18, 9:49 am, Saimhain Moose <samhainmo...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mar 18, 12:21 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Are activities not dependant on applied forces? > > > > > > > > Exactly what do you mean by "activities"? > > > > > > > Something done as an action or a movement. > > > > > > They're not the same. A movement (specifically a change in movement) > > > > > is the *response* to a force. The force is the cause, the acceleration > > > > > is the effect. Motion is not a cause. > > > > > What is the differance between acceleration & motion? > > > > How about you learn some basic physics, like the MEANINGS of the > > > words, before you try to figure out WHY things behave as they do? > > > You really can't discuss things until you've got the vocabulary > > > and are using words to have the same meanings as everybody else > > > does.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > It it wrong if I try to understand in common/logical language? > > Yes, it can be. Ordinary language is vague and imprecise, which is why > physics attaches very specific meanings to some words. The lack of > sloppiness will prevent you from making statements that are wrong. > > > > > > > Can we say, energy/force applications causing deviations from natural > > position of any substance are actions/acceleration whereas its coming > > back to natural position are reactions? eg. exciting of electrons on > > energy applications and their decaying back on leaving photons or > > contractions & relaxations in our body. Whereas motions are both way > > till its settle.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - But on the other it can also add few new things by brain-storming.
From: Y.Porat on 21 Mar 2010 01:21
On Mar 21, 3:35 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 20, 11:12 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 20, 6:00 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mar 20, 1:44 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 18, 11:29 pm, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Mar 18, 6:36 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 18, 5:28 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mar 18, 9:49 am, Saimhain Moose <samhainmo...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mar 18, 12:21 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Are activities not dependant on applied forces? > > > > > > > > > Exactly what do you mean by "activities"? > > > > > > > > Something done as an action or a movement. > > > > > > > They're not the same. A movement (specifically a change in movement) > > > > > > is the *response* to a force. The force is the cause, the acceleration > > > > > > is the effect. Motion is not a cause. > > > > > > What is the differance between acceleration & motion? > > > > > Motion includes any change in position, which can be done at constant > > > > velocity (for which the acceleration is zero) or with changing > > > > velocity (for which the acceleration is nonzero).- > > > > Let us see it with an example. Exiting of an electron by application > > > of energy & its decaying back on emitting photons. Are both of these > > > are motions & acceleration or just exiting is acceleration but its > > > decaying back not? > > > > Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > ------------------ > > IMHO > > photon emission can be > > in both cases > > (if your car collides with another car > > a lot of 'thunder and lightnings' are created > > !!(:-) > > > Y.Porat > > -------------------- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > How photons emmission can be possible on exciting state of electrons? ---------------------- why not possible ?? Y.P --------------------- |