Posted on 10/01/2005 8:10:18 PM PDT by GummyIII
We should not simply add speeds or velocities since that would not conform to the measurements made of phenomena in the universe we inhabit. The laws remain invariant under transformation. Anyway, time is an illusion and should be removed from the equations by change of variable.
Greene is one of the sharper knives in the drawer. His explanation of the observed flatness of the universe is mind-expanding.
I just added it to "philosophy." I do that with all the science threads that I post.
Not I...it's the subject, not the sidebar. I never look at the sidebars. Well, almost never.
The following is the configuration of my sidebars, which I thought was the same for everyone.
News/Activism Activism/Chapters
News/Activism Announcements
News/Activism Breaking News
News/Activism Editorial
News/Activism Free Republic
News/Activism Front Page News
What am I missing? The NY Times posted this article as an OpEd column.
BTW, I was the one who suggested to anyone on my health and science list to post this thread in the editorial sidebar. I often link a number of unrelated health and science unposted articles and posted threads when I ping my health and science list, because the admin mods want me to post these articles in chat. GummyIII posted it like a routine article.
Go to the bottom of your sidebar, and click on "configure sidebar".
How did you get the URL for that image in your last comment?
http://users.adelphia.net/~staticnrg/sidebar.png
I took a screen shot (Used SnagIT from techsmiths.com) and uploaded it to my webspace.
He editorializes too much. The title of the paper is, "Does the Inertia of a Body Depend Upon its Energy Content?". What he did was to calculate the energy difference measured for a body emitting radiaiton, in the stationary frame of the emitter, and one moving paralell to it's reference frame.
The result from the paper is:
K0 - K1 = 1/2*L/c2*v2.
Ks and Ls are energy. His conclusion was,
"If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, it's mass diminishes by L/c2." His stated equivalent was, "radiation conveys inertia between emitting and absorbing bodies."
The more general conclusion stated was,
"The mass of a body is a measure of its energy content."
"If the energy changes by L, the mass of the body changes by L/(9*1020), the energy being measured in ergs, and the mass in grammes."
His concern in this was with knowing the physics of the world, not with creating anything. To test the theory, he proposed, "It is not impossible that with bodies whose energy content is variable to a high degree(e.g. with radium salts) the theory may successfully put to the test."
It's a personal judgment call as to what sidebar you want to use -- subject to being overridden by the mods, of course. I don't think a science thread is an "editorial," but that's just my opinion. When I post a science thread, I click on the topics of "philosophy" and "culture/society." I've always done it that way. Every now and then they get dumped into "chat," but that's up to the mods.
Nevermind, I finally stumbled into adding more topics and sidebars.
Gummy dear.
I am into science than you can use on a daily basis.
Where does the energy come from on a humid day to turn my smoothed and coiffed hair into a frizzy mess.
Is energy expended or conserved when my hair goes south?
Are my wild locks actually a battery that could resolve the worlds energy woes?
I hear it moving as it crinkles, energy is happening.
BTW, Thank you!
It depends on whether you are a no0b who has just been zotted or an "old timer" who's energy is being expended. ;-) In your case, I'd say the latter. I'm sure others on here have more enlightened answers than I.
They say the a-bomb proved the equation. Maybe, but measuring the mass of the particles after the explosion must be quite a task.
Frizz is normally caused by static electricity. Dry air makes it worse, because the surface conductivity to drain the charge away is lower.
Your problem sounds like something else. The cross section of your hair is not round, or symmetric, so it has different curvature for different humidity values. It may also have twist, which varies as a function of humidity. That would also cause it to move out of place.
The energy, or driving force here is the "energy of hydration." Water absorption and adsorption occurs with an energy release. It takes energy to drive the water off.
I thought E=MC2 is what happens in fission and fusion, the result of splitting or adding protons from an atom.
The gas in the car is chemical energy.
That's only one of the many dramatic pieces of evidence. The important data after the explosion is the energy release. The calculations before the release contain both the mass converted and the equivalent energy release. The theoretical calculations made before the explosion are used to engineer the device and its energy release.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.