| |  | |  | | Raider of the lost time
Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 6,010
| |
06-03-2005, 12:36 PM
| | infinite divisibility of energy Late in the 19th century when thermodynamics as a branch of physics studying various concepts of energy was nearing full completion, the scientific community views energy as an infinitely divisible quantity into smaller and smaller chunks. Two key persons were responsible for changing this view. The 1st was http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/biog...Boltzmann.html
and the 2nd was http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/biography/Planck.html
Now, the early years of this 21st century has witnessed the full quantization of energy but the quantization of mass as started by Boltzmann remains incomplete. The reason for this is the need for a quantization of spacetime as square of energy. If energy is quantizable in its 1st power, it is more so for it to be quantizable in the 2nd power. The hint is undeniably hidden in the relativistic form of the energy wave equation, which were independently discovered by Schroedinger and later rediscovered by Klein and Gordon as noted by Dirac.
Schroedinger's relativistic wave equation was for a 'Lorentz electron' of mass  and charge  in an external vector potential  and Coulomb scalar potential  , the Hamiltonian  and linear momentum  are related by
Reference: Steven Weinberg's 'The Quantum Theory of Fields,' Volume I, Foundations, Page 4, Cambridge, 1995.
Last edited by AntonioLao; 06-03-2005 at 01:00 PM.
| | | | The Thinker
Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 3,278
48  | |
06-03-2005, 01:03 PM
| | It's interesting how Plank, who is known from his works on QM, thought that energy didn't had smallest quanta.
By saying that energy was infinitelly divisible, did they think/believe that energy wa made of particles, which were infinatelly divisible, or just of energy as itself? if it is the second one, what did they mean by infinite divisible energy? (this creates much confusion, because of the current definition of energy). | | | | Raider of the lost time
Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 6,010
| |
06-03-2005, 01:11 PM
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by GUILLE did they think/believe that energy wa made of particles | Pre-Planck era, energy is a field of a continuum analogous to the fluidity of water. Stick your hand into it, you can never catch it and the few drops that linger in your hand can be infinitely small. | | | | Raider of the lost time
Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 6,010
| |
06-04-2005, 02:37 PM
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by GUILLE what did they mean by infinite divisible energy? | It cannot be catched by the human hands nor be seen by the naked eye but we all know it's must be there just like the aether and space. | | | | The Thinker
Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 3,278
48  | |
06-04-2005, 03:01 PM
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by AntonioLao It cannot be catched by the human hands nor be seen by the naked eye but we all know it's must be there just like the aether and space. | Yes, but energy is the ability to do work, so how can ability be divided? | | | | Raider of the lost time
Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 6,010
| |
06-04-2005, 03:13 PM
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by GUILLE but energy is the ability to do work, so how can ability be divided? | the physics definition of work is given at http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Work.html
work is really the difference of energy. If this difference is zero then work is not done and the two energies are equal.
Division implies differences exist. | | | | Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 7,718
| |
01-15-2007, 10:37 PM
| Re: infinite divisibility of energy I agree on the infinite divisibilty of energy,but I consider it needs a field in order to be able to play?
That field to me is the ether,or etheric field,now I maintain that this field is slightly out
of phase with the relative universal continuum,now I also see that this etheric field is
also energy,albeit not detectable within our physical continuum,so it would seem that
we have energy that we are reasonably aquainted with and is infinitely divisible,and
it somehow interreacting with an undetectable etheric field!
Now what if energy which is forever in motion swirls around the universe fluxing here
and there.enabled by this invisible,indivisible,infinite,etheric field,was Motionless?
One outer energy in constant motion,one inner etheric energy,motionlessness.The still
providing the field,to allow expression to occur.
regards michael.
__________________ Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
reveal herself? | | | | Raider of the lost time
Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 6,010
| |
01-16-2007, 06:05 PM
| | Re: infinite divisibility of energy Quote: |
Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick I agree on the infinite divisibilty of energy | It still does not make any sense why zero mass exists but zero energy does not.
__________________ Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: ¶a(t)·¶r(t)=c² | | | | Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 7,718
| |
01-23-2007, 11:40 PM
| Re: infinite divisibility of energy Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioLao It still does not make any sense why zero mass exists but zero energy does not. | Maybe there is a need to include the irrational in the equation,then the non-sensibly
becomes when understood,sense?
regards michael.
__________________ Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
reveal herself? | | | | 9th degree Black Belt
Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 1,579
27  | |
01-23-2007, 11:58 PM
| | Re: infinite divisibility of energy Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioLao It still does not make any sense why zero mass exists but zero energy does not. | Antonio, I think the puzzle is solved by the uncertainty principle. Since motion and position can't be measured simultaneously, how could anyone have truly measured true zero mass___common sense would dictate, it has never been done___the uncertainty principle would dictate any outcomes approaching zero sizes or masses are impossible of true measurement___they are possibly sub-h, or even true c, yet still contain a very small mass value. Without this smallest mass value___these smallest entities wouldn't exist___but they do...
Regards,
Lloyd
__________________ "To develop the skill of correct thinking is in the first place to learn what you have to disregard. In order to go on, you have to know what to leave out; this is the essence of effective thinking." Kurt Godel "Time and space are modes in which we think and not conditions in which we live." Albert Einstein "The uncertainty principle is an absolute, finite, universal constant." L.G. "The tick-tick-tick of the cesium atom is a sliding-time-scaler constant of all finite universal motion." L.G. | | | |  | | |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | | | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:35 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4 Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 
VBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys.
| |