Beaconator
Valued Senior Member
$$f(x,y)={\frac{RF{\sin}( {x,\theta})}{Gf{\cos} ({y,\theta})}}$$?
Possibility of star formation around black holes
- Thread starter Beaconator
- Start date
Sorry I missed this. Yes that is an example of acceleration. The acceleration is in the opposite direction of travel. If you were working this out as a problem the acceleration would be negative. It is perfectly correct to also call this a deceleration.
You also now understand a change in the direction of velocity is acceleration, correct? You can see this because a force is needed to change the direction of a mass that is moving and Force = mass x acceleration.
Good deal.
No deal.
Beaconator
Valued Senior Member
Thank you. Truly. Now tell me does this look like garbldy gook?
$$ (MC^2)^2 + pC^2 - \frac{RFsin(x,\theta)}{Gfcos(y,\theta)}$$
Beaconator
Valued Senior Member
Duplicate
Shame. Being taught physics for free is a pretty good deal. You should accept it.
It really seems that DMOE's mission is just to argue for arguments sake. I thought that maybe there was more to him than that. Oh well.:shrug:
Last edited:
I haven't read many of your posts so I was just wondering, are you kidding?
I would hate to think there are kids who flunked math and science merely for being in denial of the negative sign.
Does it matter if the letters are capitalized or not? DMOE is worried that negative signs can't be used. Are people have trouble with their shift keys or something? Is that what this is really about? That would be just freaking awesome. Class dismissed!
R_W, you should feel no shame.
There are some things to be learned from this site, alas true science of any discipline is not in the curriculum.
Three statements proving that you find errors in your own thoughts.
For the home schoolers that may be a touchy subject. The rest of folks just crack the books and soak up as much as they can before the bell rings.
Yup, I have to conclude that I was wrong about your motives. I was in clearly in error about your motives. Alas, I am not infallible. Oh how horrible!
I guess I feel honesty is more important than refusing to admit that you are wrong - but, hey that is just me.
Class?
No need to capitalize dmoe - are you having trouble with your shift keys?
Aqueous Id, would you care to prove that I am "worried that negative signs can't be used"?
The simple fact is that you should not be Posting in this Thread if you do not know "what this is really about" - but facts seem to have no place in your "class", or with Posters of your "class".
Aqueous Id, on the other hand, your Posts are easily "dismissed".
The home schooled folks can keep dismissing the school-schooled folks all they want. They get to do that because knowledge reduces to a matter of preference. I'm beginning to see why so much of it is distasteful to them.
Yup, I have to conclude that I was wrong about your motives. I was in clearly in error about your motives. Alas, I am not infallible. Oh how horrible!
I guess I feel honesty is more important than refusing to admit that you are wrong - but, hey that is just me.
origin, you obviously misinterpreted my Post #211 :
You bring up honesty.
origin, for the sake of honest clarity, would you care to state my "motives"?
I honestly stated "maybe" and supplied Links to support that "maybe" - you misinterpreted, or misunderstood, or simply obfuscated that Post to support your own "motives".
origin, for the sake of honest clarity, would you care to state your own "motives"?
BTW, what "Force = mass x acceleration" is utilized when the direction of electromagnetic waves are changed through reflection or refraction?
Does reflection or refraction change the velocity/speed of the electromagnetic wave?
Does a retro-reflector impart any "Force = mass x acceleration" upon pulses of visible light at a wavelength of 694.3 nm?
origin, I learn new things most everyday. Sadly, most of what I learn from SciForums has very little to do with real hard science.
The soft science of psychology and the aberrations of such are presented or exhibited profusely and regularly in this Forum.
You may want to call that learning for free - I prefer to call it witnessing expressions of true personality, or the lack thereof.
I did? Well my mistake then.
I feel that your motives are simply to disagree and argue.
Maybe what? I honestly don't know what you mean.
My motives are to learn more about science from some of the amazingly smart and knowledge people here, share the small amount of knowledge that I have on the subject and expose the pseudoscience that some people try to pass as science.
F=ma is not applicable here since electomagnetic waves do not have mass.
Obviously the direction changes.
I don't know what a retro-reflector is so I cannot comment other than to say that F=ma is not applicable to light.
Sadly your decision not to learn any science here is your own choice.
Amazing - we agree on something!
Aqueous Id, why do you ignore my questions?
Who are these "home schooled folks" you speak of?
Who are these "school-schooled folks" you speak of?
If you honestly believe that true "knowledge reduces to a matter of preference", then whether you claim to be "home schooled" or "school-schooled" is irrelevant.
The Topic of this Thread is : "Possibility of star formation around black holes".
The Topic of this Thread is not : "Ad Hominem attacks against anyone who disagrees with anyone else so Aqueous Id can jump in and play inane games".
Aqueous Id, which group do you claim membership in : the "home schooled" group : or, the "school-schooled" group?
Honest answers would be appreciated.