Because there's no mods willing to say this is crap and move it to the cesspool and shut it down.
Technically speaking, it's in the right sub-forum *shrug* There are no forum rules against not understanding science after all
Because there's no mods willing to say this is crap and move it to the cesspool and shut it down.
Response here:Technically speaking, it's in the right sub-forum *shrug* There are no forum rules against not understanding science after all
No, it really isn't. I remember from junior high, doing an experiment measuring the temperature of water (ice water?) in a styrofoam cup. Unfortunately, I don't remember the details of the experiment, but it must have been similar to what we are discussing here. I do remember details of several much more complicated experiments.theorist-constant12345 said:This is far from a kids experiment...
Gibberish. And irrelevant gibberish, too. Having done such experiments before, I know exactly what happens and exactly why. All your handwaving of other effects is bunk: such effects never show up. Water in a closed, insulated container stays at room temperature because there is no energy transfer in or out of the container. It's that simple....it would be really complex because...
Have two or three "thinks".I will have a think, have a doodle on bitmap, and see if I can think up an experiment to test the idea.
The thermos bottle is sitting on my desk. It is not in motion.object in motion to friction...brings an object to a stop.
There is no water vapor here.I also presume the water vapour has a rising velocity.
Yes, it is: and a roller coaster's motion directly contradicts your claims because it obeys conservation of energy.The evidence of Kinetic energy loss and kinetic energy gain by gravity means, is experimentally proven in such things has roller coaster.
Indeed it is: which is, again, why your idea is false. What you suggested, if correct, would be perpetual motion....that is why we do not have perpetual motion...
What I suggested if correct would not be perpetual motion, the motion is always stopped when mass makes contact with mass, and a perpetual pressure is what I would call gravity of an object on the ground acting upon the ground.No, it really isn't. I remember from junior high, doing an experiment measuring the temperature of water (ice water?) in a styrofoam cup. Unfortunately, I don't remember the details of the experiment, but it must have been similar to what we are discussing here. I do remember details of several much more complicated experiments.
This really is kiddie stuff.
Gibberish. And irrelevant gibberish, too. Having done such experiments before, I know exactly what happens and exactly why. All your handwaving of other effects is bunk: such effects never show up. Water in a closed, insulated container stays at room temperature because there is no energy transfer in or out of the container. It's that simple.
More to the point, since you are the one claiming there are other phenomena at work, it is incumbent upon you to provide an experiment that can isolate and test the effect. Otherwise, it is just meaningless handwaving: a phenomena that can't ever be detected under any circumstances can't be claimed to exist.
Have two or three "thinks".
[questions on water in a vacuum already answered by origin]
The thermos bottle is sitting on my desk. It is not in motion.
There is no water vapor here.
Yes, it is: and a roller coaster's motion directly contradicts your claims because it obeys conservation of energy.
Indeed it is: which is, again, why your idea is false. What you suggested, if correct, would be perpetual motion.
Well good for you, you figured out that a 1 kg mass would exert a constant 2.2 pounds of force on the earth.What I suggested if correct would not be perpetual motion, the motion is always stopped when mass makes contact with mass, and a perpetual pressure is what I would call gravity of an object on the ground acting upon the ground.
There is no way you could possibly make any sort viable experiment.P.s still considering an experiment.
I could reverse the thinking of the experiment, and add energy to an object and make it lighter in weight maybe showing the same thing?Well good for you, you figured out that a 1 kg mass would exert a constant 2.2 pounds of force on the earth.
There is no way you could possibly make any sort viable experiment.
Wow, within minutes you have proven you could not make anything remotely close to a viable experiment. Incredible.I could reverse the thinking of the experiment, and add energy to an object and make it lighter in weight maybe showing the same thing?
Example - I could add energy to air and see if the air rises
It will take a while to get an experimental procedure correct and accurate to the test.Wow, within minutes you have proven you could not make anything remotely close to a viable experiment. Incredible.
How much pressure does air oppose on the Earth?
Does air when energy added decrease in this pressure?
Does the weather prove I am correct?
And I should ask, does air have a weight in Newton's?
If they have question marks then I obviously do not know the answer or want to double check my understanding of the answer, and if the answers are yes to my questions then this shows what i am saying about energy loss to gravity from mass to be true.Jesus christ, just shut up, you sound like a blithering idiot. It's terribly embarassing.
Goodbye, I can't stand it.
Your safest bet is to assume that the correct answer to every question you ask is the opposite of what you think the answer is. Likewise assume every statement you make is wrong.If they have question marks then I obviously do not know the answer or want to double check my understanding of the answer, and if the answers are yes to my questions then this shows what i am saying about energy loss to gravity from mass to be true.
14.7 pounds per square inch.How much pressure does air oppose on the Earth?
No. If you heated up the whole atmosphere, the pressure would not change. You'd still have 14.7 pounds of air above every square inch of sea level earth. Adding heat does not change mass we are discussing.Does air when energy added decrease in this pressure?
Nope.Does the weather prove I am correct?
No. Newtons are units of force; pounds/kilograms are units of weight.And I should ask, does air have a weight in Newton's?
Gravity causes weight here on Earth, yes.Gravity is the cause yes?
Weight is measured in units of force. The SI unit of force is the Newton.billvon said:Newtons are units of force; pounds/kilograms are units of weight.
That just means that you don't know what "perpetual motion" means. Specifically, this would be a Type 1 perpetual motion machine in that it violates the first law of thermodynamics (conservation of energy):What I suggested if correct would not be perpetual motion...
There's no such thing, so no.Can we say an object on the ground is under centripetal pressure?
Why? No one except TC is under the impression that there is good science going on here and he was already informed of that by virtue of the fact that the thread was moved here.I'm just gonna put this here...
Pounds and Kilograms are mass not weight ask the other members on here they will explain it to you.14.7 pounds per square inch.
No. If you heated up the whole atmosphere, the pressure would not change. You'd still have 14.7 pounds of air above every square inch of sea level earth. Adding heat does not change mass we are discussing.
Nope.
No. Newtons are units of force; pounds/kilograms are units of weight.
Gravity causes weight here on Earth, yes.
No such thing has centripetal pressure, I have to say it you are wrong. An object incurs a pressure on the surface, this is made by the action of gravity making a centripetal force on the object, centripetal pressure is the action of gravity always acting upon mass. 1 kg equals a constant 2.2lbs of pressure.That just means that you don't know what "perpetual motion" means. Specifically, this would be a Type 1 perpetual motion machine in that it violates the first law of thermodynamics (conservation of energy):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion#Classification
There's no such thing, so no.
Thank you for the links.Weight is measured in units of force. The SI unit of force is the Newton.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mass.html
https://www.google.com/search?q=unit of weight
The kilogram is a unit of mass. Pounds can refer to units of force or mass (lbf / lbm).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound_(mass)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound_(force)