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: JT on 19 Mar 2010 04:40 On 19 mar, 09:23, JT <jonas.thornv...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On 19 mar, 09:21, JT <jonas.thornv...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On 19 mar, 09:02, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mar 16, 4:39 pm, dlzc <dl...(a)cox.net> wrote: > > > > > Dear Kumar: > > > > > On Mar 16, 4:35 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Newton's third law is frequently stated > > > > > > "Action and reaction are equal and opposite > > > > > To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction" > > > > > ... > > > > > I have some questions:- > > > > > > 1. Is it also true that "to every reaction there is equal > > > > > and opposite action"? > > > > > This is just causality and / or a decision of "which came first". The > > > > third law is more a statement of conservation of momentum. > > > > -------------------------------- > > > it seems that you dont know that all the 'statics science' > > > on with all your buildings are based is > > > based on that law!! > > > in all those cases there is no the conventional momentum!! > > > it is STATICS !!! > > > > and without that law > > > a structural engineer cannot do a single step > > > so > > > thank you Old Isak Newton even just for that !!! > > > > you are right only in sense that i am sure it was not in your mind: > > > ie > > > even gravitation and counter forces of it > > > are done > > > BY NONSTOP MOVEMENT OF GRAVITONS > > > back and forth !! > > > and those are IMHO the movement of 'Circlons ' > > > > ATB > > > Y.Porat > > > ------------------- > > > > > > 2. Can we consider action or reaction as activities > > > > > or motions and as law hold universal application, > > > > > whether above action reaction relationship will apply > > > > > to all our activities? > > > > > The neck you slit pushed back against your knife. Does that help you > > > > in some way? > > > > > Science in general serves to describe determinism, but Newton's third > > > > is not what you are seeking. > > > > > David A. Smith- Dölj citerad text - > > > > - Visa citerad text -- Dölj citerad text - > > > > - Visa citerad text - > > > But if the photons are circlons looking like slinkys with polarity, > > that do get stretched out travelling the electromagnetic medium of > > universe losing there bouncyness and gaining a strong polarity so that > > they no longer can prevent from clogin up together, and they can no > > longer escape bounce a surface when their wavelength and amplitude is > > zero. > > > They are stretched out current thread bipoles looking that will clog > > with other stretched out bipoles so when it come in contact/collide > > with elementar matter that is built from those tiny bipolar strings > > they stuck as glue on their surface. > > > And if there is no matter around when they stretch out gaining > > polarity they will smash into eachother making clogs of strings > > becoming elementar particles. > > > Do we really need gravitons could not gravitation be an effect of > > strings with polarity clogging up together making current in the micro > > realm, creating elementar particles. And the attraction from > > gravitation be the tension of photons trying to break lose from > > matter? > > > JT- Dölj citerad text - > > > - Visa citerad text - > > Gravitation is photons preparing for jump ;D- Dölj citerad text - Ooops between two field potentials. Streaming matter ;D > - Visa citerad text -
From: Kumar on 19 Mar 2010 07:03 On Mar 19, 1:09 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 18, 3:36 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. > > ------------------ > 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?
From: Y.Porat on 19 Mar 2010 07:48 On Mar 19, 10:21 am, JT <jonas.thornv...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On 19 mar, 09:02, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 16, 4:39 pm, dlzc <dl...(a)cox.net> wrote: > > > > Dear Kumar: > > > > On Mar 16, 4:35 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Newton's third law is frequently stated > > > > > "Action and reaction are equal and opposite > > > > To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction" > > > > ... > > > > I have some questions:- > > > > > 1. Is it also true that "to every reaction there is equal > > > > and opposite action"? > > > > This is just causality and / or a decision of "which came first". The > > > third law is more a statement of conservation of momentum. > > > -------------------------------- > > it seems that you dont know that all the 'statics science' > > on with all your buildings are based is > > based on that law!! > > in all those cases there is no the conventional momentum!! > > it is STATICS !!! > > > and without that law > > a structural engineer cannot do a single step > > so > > thank you Old Isak Newton even just for that !!! > > > you are right only in sense that i am sure it was not in your mind: > > ie > > even gravitation and counter forces of it > > are done > > BY NONSTOP MOVEMENT OF GRAVITONS > > back and forth !! > > and those are IMHO the movement of 'Circlons ' > > > ATB > > Y.Porat > > ------------------- > > > > > 2. Can we consider action or reaction as activities > > > > or motions and as law hold universal application, > > > > whether above action reaction relationship will apply > > > > to all our activities? > > > > The neck you slit pushed back against your knife. Does that help you > > > in some way? > > > > Science in general serves to describe determinism, but Newton's third > > > is not what you are seeking. > > > > David A. Smith- Dölj citerad text - > > > - Visa citerad text -- Dölj citerad text - > > > - Visa citerad text - > > But if the photons are circlons looking like slinkys with polarity, > that do get stretched out travelling the electromagnetic medium of > universe losing there bouncyness and gaining a strong polarity so that > they no longer can prevent from clogin up together, and they can no > longer escape bounce a surface when their wavelength and amplitude is > zero. > > They are stretched out current thread bipoles looking that will clog > with other stretched out bipoles so when it come in contact/collide > with elementar matter that is built from those tiny bipolar strings > they stuck as glue on their surface. > > And if there is no matter around when they stretch out gaining > polarity they will smash into eachother making clogs of strings > becoming elementar particles. > > Do we really need gravitons could not gravitation be an effect of > strings with polarity clogging up together making current in the micro > realm, creating elementar particles. And the attraction from > gravitation be the tension of photons trying to break lose from > matter? > > JT ----------------- good questions but quite simple answers first go to the appendix of my site and have a primer look at that surprisingly simple and powerful idea: http://sites.google.com/site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract --------- and sone of its properties that i explained but certainly you have no obligation to follow (:) 1 the circlon moves NATURALLY IN A CLOSED CIRCLE UNLESS DISTURBED BY ANOTHER ONE IN ITS WAY and then retreats back in a reverse circular path (the other one that was inits way retreats as well backwards ) 2 the redius of that retreat back is dependent in the angle of collition between the two circlons involved 9if th other one was exactly in the path that the first one was suppposed to go one the retreat of both of them is perdectly backwards other wise they wil move back in anothe radius than the orriginal i tmeans that those Circlons canmove **in any radius from the minimal microcosm of say the nuclear distances to the maximal distances of galaxies !!! 2 i tmoves that way naturally: ie nothing is forcing it to move that way they move that way because that is how they 'were boron "" (ie it i s a postulate!!) th test of tha t postulate will be in **how far ot others will be able to go with it !! 3 btw this month i defined the smallest photon energy and mass !! the mass as ~ 4 exp-94 Kilograms !! i will not be surprised if i will be able relate it to my 'Circlon' as well !! (:-) 4 if you have more questions please ask !! ATB Y.Porat ----------------------
From: Y.Porat on 19 Mar 2010 07:53 On Mar 19, 10:23 am, JT <jonas.thornv...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On 19 mar, 09:21, JT <jonas.thornv...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On 19 mar, 09:02, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mar 16, 4:39 pm, dlzc <dl...(a)cox.net> wrote: > > > > > Dear Kumar: > > > > > On Mar 16, 4:35 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Newton's third law is frequently stated > > > > > > "Action and reaction are equal and opposite > > > > > To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction" > > > > > ... > > > > > I have some questions:- > > > > > > 1. Is it also true that "to every reaction there is equal > > > > > and opposite action"? > > > > > This is just causality and / or a decision of "which came first". The > > > > third law is more a statement of conservation of momentum. > > > > -------------------------------- > > > it seems that you dont know that all the 'statics science' > > > on with all your buildings are based is > > > based on that law!! > > > in all those cases there is no the conventional momentum!! > > > it is STATICS !!! > > > > and without that law > > > a structural engineer cannot do a single step > > > so > > > thank you Old Isak Newton even just for that !!! > > > > you are right only in sense that i am sure it was not in your mind: > > > ie > > > even gravitation and counter forces of it > > > are done > > > BY NONSTOP MOVEMENT OF GRAVITONS > > > back and forth !! > > > and those are IMHO the movement of 'Circlons ' > > > > ATB > > > Y.Porat > > > ------------------- > > > > > > 2. Can we consider action or reaction as activities > > > > > or motions and as law hold universal application, > > > > > whether above action reaction relationship will apply > > > > > to all our activities? > > > > > The neck you slit pushed back against your knife. Does that help you > > > > in some way? > > > > > Science in general serves to describe determinism, but Newton's third > > > > is not what you are seeking. > > > > > David A. Smith- Dölj citerad text - > > > > - Visa citerad text -- Dölj citerad text - > > > > - Visa citerad text - > > > But if the photons are circlons looking like slinkys with polarity, > > that do get stretched out travelling the electromagnetic medium of > > universe losing there bouncyness and gaining a strong polarity so that > > they no longer can prevent from clogin up together, and they can no > > longer escape bounce a surface when their wavelength and amplitude is > > zero. > > > They are stretched out current thread bipoles looking that will clog > > with other stretched out bipoles so when it come in contact/collide > > with elementar matter that is built from those tiny bipolar strings > > they stuck as glue on their surface. > > > And if there is no matter around when they stretch out gaining > > polarity they will smash into eachother making clogs of strings > > becoming elementar particles. > > > Do we really need gravitons could not gravitation be an effect of > > strings with polarity clogging up together making current in the micro > > realm, creating elementar particles. And the attraction from > > gravitation be the tension of photons trying to break lose from > > matter? > > > JT- Dölj citerad text - > > > - Visa citerad text - > > Gravitation is photons preparing for jump ;D ------------------ i dont think so!! no physical entity that moves *in straight lines* can do any attraction force!! (except mathematical paper farthing !!) (it is because of conservation of momentum as well !!) and that is exactly why i suggested that 'Circlon'!! ATB Y.Porat ------------------------
From: Y.Porat on 19 Mar 2010 08:06
On Mar 19, 1:03 pm, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 19, 1:09 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 18, 3:36 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. > > > ------------------ > > 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 !! 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 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 !!! ATB Y.Porat -------------------- ATB Y.Porat ------------------- |