E is NOT m c squared you stupid Einstein, let me prove it to you

[dedanoe]

Dot multiply the force and the distance you get the energy: E = F D; Cross multiply the force and the distance you get the torque: T = F D; By intensity E = |F| |D| cos and |T| = |F| |D| sin square them then sum them up: |F| |D| = sqrt(E^2 + |T|^2); The difference in |F| |D| is Work: W = |F| d|D| + |D| d|F|; Then comes Newton the freakstein: F = m a = m V / t = m x / t^2; multiply both sides in F t^2 = m x with freely chosen y you get F y t^2 = E t^2 = m x y. Here F must remain collinear with x because otherwise Newton the 2nd fails while y's direction is any so it all comes down to E = m V_x V_y. The kinetic energy as formulated by Newton is restriction of type x = y so that E = m V^2 but in general that is not the case. Later on E = m V^2 must meet the conditions from Einstein's SRT that put the system at rest so it can be E = m c^2. This outcome E = m c^2 from so many restrictions may never be used as general law. Go fuck them both of Newton and Einstein.

[tahn1000]

...... i think i'll have to take your word for it

[dedanoe]

humans invented time so they could make money on time

[Anarch]

I print in black here because I can not find the invisible ink.

[dedanoe]

i was saying if F t = const = m V then F dt = -t dF which means that just because of time going by force gains its punch? meet the ill western rationalism where everything is formulated in fractions: where is the reciprocity here?

[Cartesiantheater]

Dot multiply the force and the distance you get the energy: E = F D; Cross multiply the force and the distance you get the torque: T = F D; By intensity E = |F| |D| cos and |T| = |F| |D| sin square them then sum them up: |F| |D| = sqrt(E^2 + |T|^2); The difference in |F| |D| is Work: W = |F| d|D| + |D| d|F|; Then comes Newton the freakstein: F = m a = m V / t = m x / t^2; multiply both sides in F t^2 = m x with freely chosen y you get F y t^2 = E t^2 = m x y. Here F must remain collinear with x because otherwise Newton the 2nd fails while y's direction is any so it all comes down to E = m V_x V_y. The kinetic energy as formulated by Newton is restriction of type x = y so that E = m V^2 but in general that is not the case. Later on E = m V^2 must meet the conditions from Einstein's SRT that put the system at rest so it can be E = m c^2. This outcome E = m c^2 from so many restrictions may never be used as general law. Go fuck them both of Newton and Einstein.

Your mistake is highlighted.

Newton's Force law does not work at relativistic velocities, unless you use relativistic momentum.

[dedanoe]

Your mistake is highlighted.

Newton's Force law does not work at relativistic velocities, unless you use relativistic momentum.

yes i know it doesn't work... imagine a weight-measuring instrument with variable force/mass ratio. what a nightmare it would be to translate between every two measurements? certainly, you can only imagine it cause world wide conventions and standards eliminate that possibility.

[Cartesiantheater]

yes i know it doesn't work... imagine a weight-measuring instrument with variable force/mass ratio. what a nightmare it would be to translate between every two measurements? certainly, you can only imagine it cause world wide conventions and standards eliminate that possibility.

But why even worry about it? Newton's laws work fine for almost every conceivable every day measurement. As long as it isn't involving objects orbiting the earth or something like that, who cares?

Not to mention, computer programs could handle all the calculations if they were needed.

[dedanoe]

listen cartesian, you try your self to formulate the lever law for system of at least three material points on same level of hierarchy then come back here and tell me if newton's laws are still holding good.

[Cartesiantheater]

listen cartesian, you try your self to formulate the lever law for system of at least three material points on same level of hierarchy then come back here and tell me if newton's laws are still holding good.

The universe itself is very complex and chaotic, so if you want to model it with accuracy, it stands to reason that the level of mathematical sophistication required to do so would go up with the level of detail of your model.

[dedanoe]

generally, lever is system of many weights at some distance from the center organized in some hierarchy. can you give us three examples of lever which meet that definition: galaxy is lever, human body is lever, atom is lever? inside the human body there are atoms, inside galaxies there are human bodies and inside atoms there are galaxies?

[Cartesiantheater]

generally, lever is system of many weights at some distance from the center organized in some hierarchy. can you give us three examples of lever which meet that definition: galaxy is lever, human body is lever, atom is lever? inside the human body there are atoms, inside galaxies there are human bodies and inside atoms there are galaxies?

I can't, on the grounds that I don't have time to study your lever theory. I'm too busy with other things at the moment. Sorry. After I get out of graduate school in a few years, if you're still around.