Re: Frame Question. Where does the energy go?

On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 01:04:29 -0800 (PST), Jerry
<Cephalobus_alienus@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Feb 14, 6:27 pm, hw@..(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:

I'm highly amused at his. You apparently don't even know that a
car is always at rest in its own frame. The frame moves with
the car. You are an incorrigible frame jumper...as we already
know.

Sheesh! -Now- I finally understand your idiot accusations
concerning Paul's alleged "frame jumping".

An INERTIAL frame does not follow the car through all of its
accelerations and decelerations, twists and turns, starts and
stops.

That's why it is called an INERTIAL frame.

Paul defined an inertial frame in which the traveling car was
motionless, then computed speed, momentum and kinetic energy of
the traveling car and the earth with respect to this inertial
frame.

Paul then applied the car's brakes.

This action, ahem, "detached" the car from the initially defined
inertial frame. (cough, cough)

Paul's statement was that "after the braking, the momentum was (M+m)V",.......
IN THE CAR'S NEW INERTAIL CONDITION.

In the driver's inertial frames:
Initial KE of Earth = 5E40
Final KE of earth = 0

How does his brief acceleration alter HIS appraisal of the energy equation?

With respect to this initially defined INERTIAL frame, which by
definition does not experience any accelerations or decelerations
and by definition does not follow the car through its twists and
turns and starts and stops, Paul then computed speed, momentum
and kinetic energy of the braked car and the earth.

Jerry



Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)

www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm.

......
.

Relevant Pages