OK so let's say you raise it 1 millimeter. The energy expended is .01 joules. A joule is a watt-second, so that's equivalent to 10 milliwatts (about enough to run a very small LED) for 1 second.
Science already knows the magic of gravity
- Thread starter theorist-constant12345
- Start date
If we were to raise it 10mm would that need 100 milliwatts ?
9.81n is .01 joules per second extraction from an object by gravity?
An object of 1 kg mass, how many joules of energy a second does it gain from the environment?
No.
What?
What "energy" do think an object gains from the environment?
Under what circumstances?
Interesting question, I presume you mean which energy subset like electrostatic.
I am unsure, I am quite sure science knows more than me about this.
I will just say heat and kinetic energy from air molecules surrounding objects, or consideration for radiation levels.
Circumstance, just an object on the shelf for example.
Thank you for the interesting read,
I think the biggest mistake Humanity makes is in the consideration of ''stationary''. There is no stationary in the entire Universe. Everything is always moving.
Even an object stationary on Earth is still under a constant acceleration by gravity, although the object has no velocity relative to its position, the object is still falling and trying to accelerate through the ground.
And one YOU should have thought about before asking such a generalised question.
In which case: essentially none.
It is easier for me to speak in a general sense like saying just energy, when you say essentially no energy gain for an object on a shelf that is a surprise to me, I thought thermodynamics played a part in all matter?
In other words you're too lazy or ignorant of the subject to ask a question meaningfully.
If an object is sat on the shelf - and has been there for a while [1] - it will be at the same temperature as all other objects in the room (hint: room temperature).
How, then, will there be any exchange of energy?
1 Assuming it's not just come out of the fridge or anything like that.
Good wording Dy,
Yes the object will be at room temperature, I am suggesting that energy is lost to the ground but at the same time is being replaced by the room.
What is lost is gained at the same rate.
If you turn off a gas fire that has warmed the room up, the warm in the room is soon lost to the walls of the room, objects in the room, the floor?
The warm air loses its charge?
If it's on a shelf then it's not losing energy to the ground.
(And nor is the shelf).
Only if it's colder outside than it is inside.
Like I said - essentially none.
An object on a shelf can be considered at equilibrium.
You have to specify exact conditions before working how much, if any, energy is being transferred.
What "charge"?
Warm air is WARM - not "charged".
Ok, I am going bed in a minute so will leave some work done to think about.
The work involved in heating a room by a gas fire.
The gas is converted into a flame that burns off the gas, the flame releases pure positive energy into the atmosphere that then excites the air molecules charging the molecules , the kinetic energy of excitement is then what we define as heat.
This energy is then transferred to objects by the medium where also the molecules become excited of the object, the object on the shelf transfers its energy gain to the mass of the shelf, the shelf transfers its energy gain to the walls mass, the wall then transfers its energy gain to the gravity of the earth.
No.
It's thermal energy.
I have no idea what you mean by "pure positive" energy.
No.
What makes you think "charging" takes place?
No.
It's not "transferred to gravity" it's transferred to the material of the Earth (soil, rocks etc).
No, milliwatts are units of power, not energy.
No.
Just sitting there? It gains no kinetic energy.
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
What about the energy change involved in moving from the sublime to the ridiculous?
Pure positive energy means to me the fundamental breakdown of the gas into raw energy, a pure energy that is always and only ever a plus with no negativity.
What makes me think a charging takes place?
Presently it is considered that mediums or matter absorbs heat, I have just a hunch that is the molecules that excite and generate the heat because of explanation of ice and the atoms becoming more dormant in the Kinetics department. Also considering car tyres in motion, there is no absorbing of heat from the atmosphere, the tyres generate their own energy by Ke.
Soil and rock has mass.
Last edited:
There is no such thing as "raw energy", nor does "negative energy exist.
Apart from not even addressing my question this is absolute bollocks.
Which absorbs the heat: it does NOT get "transferred to gravity".
(Oh, and haven't you claimed elsewhere that gravity is nothing to do with mass? I.e. you can't even keep your own nonsense straight).
The more you learn the more you improve , once i understood newtons was weight I got it. To your other questions I will answer when I have asked some questions in other section, I need to cover the BB and black holes.