Why Ec2=m and energy x acceleration=force are true
- Thread starter ryan2006
- Start date
More nonsense.
What is anything squared? The number, times itself. Didn't you learn this in grade school?
Yes, there is a single value of c and the speed of light is constant in all reference frames but so what? Multiplying that number by anything (including itself) neither adds nor subtracts to the constancy of c in all reference frames.I thought everything was supposed to be shown that there is a single constant value of c, not $$c^{2}$$, lol.
No matter how many ways you write it, the formula is useless to anyone who doesn't understand what the relationships mean, and cannot apply it to the pursuit of understanding nature.
Eienstien used algebra remember and E has a value M has a value and c2 has a value. Let's use some algebra, trig, calculus along with some statistical wave math. Lets say 0 is the center on an x, y, and z planes of existence inotherwards a quadrant chart. Now lets plot the path of E, M and c2. For example, E + 1/m-2= c2(c2+1) x the square root of 4. Or A(E-1) x B(Mx2)=Z +1 am I making sense yet?
Maximum Planck said:
Not superior, just that they actually attended the lectures and labs, studied, and burned the midnight oil in order to learn how to solve the very basic problems you cannot begin to address, since you wasted away your educational years - so yeah, I can see how you would feel like you have reason to identify the accomplished people with - were you referring to prowess? - since you no doubt feel so inadequate discussing science, even though you have donned the prosthetic appliance of - Maximum Planck? How appropriate. Just remember: you must first get the Planck out of your own eye so that you may see, in order to remove the quantum particle from theirs. :m:
You were told in the site rules that this is a place of scientific discussion. What did you expect?
Maximum_Planck
Registered Member
Yes, I am.
if you are from a "cabal", you will say that you are not.
but their very condescending
and you think talking like that helps me get rid of chip?
Maximum_Planck
Registered Member
NOPE. Please don't quote the Bible.
Ah, so you're an anti-science Creationist. Case closed.
Except, of course, physics -- which was the topic here.
Well not exactly the same. Note the problem you'd have calculating the one on the left using real arithmetic (esp. computing) for the case A<0, B<0, vs. the absence of the problem calculating the one on the right under the same conditions.
See, this is why I was never more than a mediocre programmer.
Not even a little tiny bit...:shrug:
Blessed are the cheese makers.
Don’t be too harsh on yourself. Sometimes the simplest mathematical details escape our attention until pointed out to us.Cool, I'm an idiot...
The detail here being the branch cut of the square root function. If we define $$i = \sqrt{-1}$$ then $$\frac{\sqrt{1}}{\sqrt{-1}} = \frac{1}{i} = -i$$ yet $$\sqrt{\frac{1}{-1}} = \sqrt{-1} = i$$. A similar problem occures if we define $$-i = \sqrt{-1}$$ so the problem traces to the existence of the branch cut.
If we have some sort of multi-valued arithmetic, we can write $$ ( i | -i ) = \pm \sqrt{-1}$$ and then $$ ( i | -i ) = \pm\sqrt{-1} = \pm\sqrt{\frac{1}{-1}} \approx \frac{\pm\sqrt{1}}{\pm\sqrt{-1}} = \frac{1}{(i | -i)} = ( -i | i ) \approx ( i | -i ) $$ were the last equivalence is not an equals sign, but an observation that unitary minus and/or conjugation just permutes the order of the multi-values.
If we have some sort of multi-valued arithmetic, we can write $$ ( i | -i ) = \pm \sqrt{-1}$$ and then $$ ( i | -i ) = \pm\sqrt{-1} = \pm\sqrt{\frac{1}{-1}} \approx \frac{\pm\sqrt{1}}{\pm\sqrt{-1}} = \frac{1}{(i | -i)} = ( -i | i ) \approx ( i | -i ) $$ were the last equivalence is not an equals sign, but an observation that unitary minus and/or conjugation just permutes the order of the multi-values.
That is true; nevertheless the formula $$\sqrt{\frac{a}{b}}=\frac{\sqrt{a}}{\sqrt{b}}$$ is valid when $$a$$ and $$b$$ are positive real numbers. In the equation $$c=\sqrt{\frac{E}{m}}=\frac{\sqrt{E}}{\sqrt{m}}$$ the values for energy and mass are indeed real and positive – unless we’re talking about tachyons.
Last edited:
It would really help the discussion if you did not write sentences that look like they were constructed with a random word generator.