Welcome to the ToeQuest.
+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 21 to 28 of 28
  1. #21
    The Thinker Guille is a glorious beacon of light Guille is a glorious beacon of light
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    3,278
    Blog Entries
    7
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 12x in 9 Posts
    Rep Power
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by baudrunner
    The problem with this reasoning is that gravity always exists as long as there is space.

    In the discussion of the electromagnetic forces of repulsion and attraction (which by the way have nothing to do with gravity) you neglect to note that electrons are always in motion, so the relationship that they have with protons are that what they lack in mass they make up for in velocity, so that is why the charges are balanced, and why time is balanced. In electric current, the electrons are again in motion, at virtually light speed. Again, the rule applies, negative and positive charges balance out. This more or less proves that electrons are the charge carriers, the term "carriers" implying that they are in motion, and not the "holes", the positive ions.
    I agree but is this really all independent and irrelatvant for gravity? Now, this division beteen motion and mass is the same as KE and PE. And E is the sum of these two, and it is directly realted to gravity.

  2. #22
    Raider of the lost time AntonioLao is a splendid one to behold AntonioLao is a splendid one to behold AntonioLao is a splendid one to behold AntonioLao is a splendid one to behold
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    11,265
    Blog Entries
    10
    Thanks Given
    1,083
    Thanked 1,411x in 1,137 Posts
    Rep Power
    152
    Quote Originally Posted by dleviwing
    You may wish to rethink this concept or give reference to what leads you to believe it.
    The sum of the squares of the spin for each particle. If you accept with the idea of spin in quantum mechanics then it is stipulated that the neutrinos ar spin-1/2 fermions and the photon are spin-1 bosons. Add 4 squares of 1/2 give the square of 1.
    Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²

  3. #23
    Moderator mkirkpatrick has much to be proud of mkirkpatrick has much to be proud of mkirkpatrick has much to be proud of mkirkpatrick has much to be proud of mkirkpatrick has much to be proud of mkirkpatrick has much to be proud of
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    11,259
    Blog Entries
    4
    Thanks Given
    285
    Thanked 839x in 676 Posts
    Rep Power
    149

    Smile is mass independant of thought?

    I dont want to get in a mess over mass,but can mass be independant of thought
    and if so,I would be grateful for an explanation.Great topic though.




    kind regards michel.
    Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
    reveal herself?

  4. #24
    The Thinker Guille is a glorious beacon of light Guille is a glorious beacon of light
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    3,278
    Blog Entries
    7
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 12x in 9 Posts
    Rep Power
    62
    Mass is a type of energy and also is thought. Thought is presentedin many types of energies in fact. According to Antonio, a thought could be a graviton, or a photon, or an electron. If the thought is a graviton (and I don't know when it is so, nor what woudl it mean), then I guess mass is NOT independent of thought.

  5. #25
    Moderator mkirkpatrick has much to be proud of mkirkpatrick has much to be proud of mkirkpatrick has much to be proud of mkirkpatrick has much to be proud of mkirkpatrick has much to be proud of mkirkpatrick has much to be proud of
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    11,259
    Blog Entries
    4
    Thanks Given
    285
    Thanked 839x in 676 Posts
    Rep Power
    149

    Smile in a mess over the mass.

    Quote Originally Posted by <<>>
    Mass is a type of energy and also is thought. Thought is presentedin many types of energies in fact. According to Antonio, a thought could be a graviton, or a photon, or an electron. If the thought is a graviton (and I don't know when it is so, nor what woudl it mean), then I guess mass is NOT independent of thought.
    That is avery good answer my friend
    you can go to the top of the class,and get threegold stars,thank you.


    regardsmichael
    Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
    reveal herself?

  6. #26
    Raider of the lost time AntonioLao is a splendid one to behold AntonioLao is a splendid one to behold AntonioLao is a splendid one to behold AntonioLao is a splendid one to behold
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    11,265
    Blog Entries
    10
    Thanks Given
    1,083
    Thanked 1,411x in 1,137 Posts
    Rep Power
    152

    dependence

    Quote Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick
    but can mass be independant of thought
    No. It is more of a dependence. Thought is energy as Guille said. But when the waves of energy are out of phase mass is created and the energy becomes concentrated and localized and no more radiation (not exactly true because of blackbody radiation and the existence of temperature).
    Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²

  7. #27
    The Observer dleviwing is a splendid one to behold dleviwing is a splendid one to behold dleviwing is a splendid one to behold dleviwing is a splendid one to behold dleviwing is a splendid one to behold
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    2,140
    Blog Entries
    5
    Thanks Given
    25
    Thanked 144x in 95 Posts
    Rep Power
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by AntonioLao
    The sum of the squares of the spin for each particle. If you accept with the idea of spin in quantum mechanics then it is stipulated that the neutrinos ar spin-1/2 fermions and the photon are spin-1 bosons. Add 4 squares of 1/2 give the square of 1.
    Spin is an intrinsic value like charge. Summing the squares is meaningless.
    David

  8. #28
    Raider of the lost time AntonioLao is a splendid one to behold AntonioLao is a splendid one to behold AntonioLao is a splendid one to behold AntonioLao is a splendid one to behold
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    11,265
    Blog Entries
    10
    Thanks Given
    1,083
    Thanked 1,411x in 1,137 Posts
    Rep Power
    152

    point taken

    Quote Originally Posted by dleviwing
    Spin is an intrinsic value like charge.
    Point taken. However, the square of a physical appears in various guises in Coulomb's inverse square law: the square of charge; in Newton's law of universal gravitation: square of mass; in Dirac's theory of electron of relativistic wave equation: the square of energy. In the kinetic theory of heat: the square of velocity; etc.
    Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²


 

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. How does matter get its mass from the ether?
    By wisp in forum General Physics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-20-2006, 10:20 PM
  2. Rearrangement of physic's foundation
    By Duane Ertle in forum Cosmology
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 02-17-2006, 03:27 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Back to top