Re: Potential energy in Einstein's 1905 Relativity

On 4 mayo, 16:28, karandash2...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On May 4, 1:06 pm, v...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:





On 4 mayo, 08:27, karandash2...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

On May 4, 3:31 am, v...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

On 3 mayo, 09:41, karandash2...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

On May 3, 3:45 am, v...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
<old fart Rafaelshito idiocies snipped>
.

Can you claim that E is total energy in system S'? E is ALWAYS
potential energy, being equal to total energy only if kinetic energy
is zero, as is the case in system S.
RVHG(Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)

<rest of idiocies snipped>

No, cretin, you must be getting really desperate. E is total energy.
Go back to counting the days before your pension arrives.

Confusing again the meaning of the letters? In Einstein's paper
doesn't appears a single E without sub-index, when I write "E is
ALWAYS potential energy" I am referring to E_0 and E_1, the unique E's
that are used in the paper and always representing potential energy.
The total energy in system S' are H_0 and H_1(before and after the
light emission). In system S', E_0 and E_1 are NOT total energy. Only
in the system S are E_0 and E_1 total energy, because with zero
kinetic energy potential energy is equal to total energy. Your claim
that "E is total energy" doesn't apply to system S'.
What kind of energies are E_0 and E_1 in Einstein's paper when
referring to system S'?
RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)

Same difference, desperate cretin. Go back to counting the days until
your meager pension arrives.- Ocultar texto de la cita -

- Mostrar texto de la cita -

What kind of energy are E_0 and E_1 in the formulas H_0 - E_0=K_0+C
and
H_1 - E_1=K_1+C that appears in Einstein's paper?

Obviously, total energy before gama emission as viewed from frames S0
and S1, persistent cretin.

You have a minor confusion managing the indexes 0 and 1. They denote
the before and after light emission instances, not the S and S'
inertial frames. Both E_0 and E_1 refer to the same inertial frame S
where the body is at rest.
>You will insist that

they are "total energy"? And then what kind of energy are H_0 and H_1?

Total energy after the gama emission as viwed from frames S0 and S1,
patented imbecile.

H_0 and H_1 are total energy before and after the light emission, but
both with respect to the same inertial frame S' where the body is
moving.
Taking into account your previous answer, you are saying that E_0,
E_1, H_0 and H_1 are all total energy. But total energy is not a kind
of energy, its unique meaning in 1905 is total energy equals potential
energy plus kinetic energy, the Principle of Energy Conservation that
Einstein is using in his paper. Total energy is the addition of two
different kind of energies, the potential one E that depends only on
body position (not depending on velocity), and the kinetic one K that
depends only on body velocity (not depending on position). I put here
(once more) the relevant Einstein's words in his paper where he uses
together all the energies H, E and K, jointly with the arbitrary
additive constant C characteristic of potential energy (only its
presence in the paper is sufficient to support the managing of
potential energy):
"H and E are energy values of the same body referred to two systems of
co-ordinates which are in motion relatively to each other, the body
being at rest in one of the two systems (system S). Thus, it is clear
that the difference H-E can differ from the kinetic energy K of the
body, with respect to the other system S', only by an additive
constant C, which depends on the choice of the arbitrary additive
constant of the energies H and E. Thus we may place
H_0-E_0=K_0+C
H_1-E_1=K_1+C
since C does not change during the emission of light".
Can you say that H=(E+C)+K is not the general expression for the
Principle of Energy Conservation in 1905 denoting that total energy H
is equal to potential energy E (with its characteristic arbitrary
additive constant C) plus kinetic energy K? If you insist that E is
not potential energy here, explain to me what other thing is E having
an arbitrary additive constant C and when adding a kinetic energy K
being equal to a total energy H.
In system S where kinetic energy is zero total energy is equal to E,
but at the same time it is equal to potential energy, the unique kind
of energy a body at rest can have in 1905.

Your only choice just now is stop posting, you have no more options to
support your absurd position.

RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)- Hide quoted text -

It is a very simple paper, autistic imbecile, it only has very few
variables and very few formulas. Do you want me to explain them to you
line by line?

I am the one doing it for you since the start of our talking, making
direct references to the relevant Einstein's own words, but if you
think that it is necessary to go in more details, go ahead. Try to
make an explanation of Einstein's paper in the 1905 context without
potential energy, you will convince yourself that this is totally
impossible. Don't forget that total energy is not a kind of energy,
but the adding of different kinds of them.
Go back to counting the days until your meager pension arrives.- Ocultar texto de la cita -

- Mostrar texto de la cita -

RVHG(Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)


.

Quantcast