Simplifying Terms
in [Relativity]
|
From: Inertial on 25 Jan 2010 09:15 "jdawe" <mrjdawe(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:75e73d63-1424-4e82-aa94-d035caa22167(a)m26g2000yqb.googlegroups.com... > On Jan 24, 9:58 pm, jdawe <mrjd...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> We have 'mass' : >> >> Energy >> >> or >> >> Matter >> >> That can be: >> >> In Motion >> >> or >> >> At Rest >> >> Which simply means we have: >> >> energy in motion >> >> or >> >> energy at rest >> >> + >> >> matter in motion >> >> or >> >> matter at rest >> >> So, we don't need to make up terms like 'kinetic' to refer to energy >> in motion or 'potential energy' to refer to energy at rest. We simply >> have: >> >> energy in motion >> >> or >> >> energy at rest >> >> Which brings me to 'force' : >> >> push >> >> or >> >> pull >> >> Now rather than trying to make up a special term to refer to the pull >> force of gravity as 'emitted pull' and the pull force of fluid matter >> as maybe 'potential pull' we can simply: >> >> call gravity 'pull in motion' >> >> or >> >> call fluid matter 'pull at rest' >> >> So, therefore we have: >> >> pull in motion >> >> or >> >> pull at rest >> >> + >> >> push in motion >> >> or >> >> push at rest >> >> Naturally, >> >> push\pull at rest decelerates an object. >> >> or >> >> push\pull in motion accelerates an object. >> >> -Josh. > > So the force opposing tree now looks like: > > force = push + pull The only difference between push and pull is direction > with: > > push = push at rest + push in motion > > pull = pull at rest + pull in motion > > then: > > push at rest = matter at rest + energy at rest > > pull at rest = matter in motion + energy in motion > > to get push in motion we invert energy\matter at rest into energy > \matter in motion. > > to get pull in motion we invert energy\matter in motion into energy > \matter at rest. What a load of meaningless drivel you spew out.
First
|
Prev
|
Pages: 1 2 Prev: de Broglie's statement and the double slit experiment Next: THE ORIGIN OF LIFE AFTER DEATH |