Re: No infinite energy needed for lightspeed

jonathan cyriax brast wrote:
Spaceman schrieb:
jonathan cyriax brast wrote:
Spaceman schrieb:
Paul Cardinale wrote:
On Sep 12, 9:29 pm, "Spaceman"
<space...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Paul Cardinale wrote:
On Sep 12, 6:18 pm, "Spaceman"
<space...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Mass does not gain mass with speed,
It gains energy. (KE)
The energy it gains is a direct consequence
of the energy you give it.
the mass never changes from the speed,
The Kinetic energy it can produce does
but the mass remains the same.
1 kilogram of mass at the speed of light does not
need infinite energy at all.
It needs a whole bunch... but not infinite.
Or are both
E=mc^2
and
KE=1/2mv^2
wrong?
E = m * c^2 is applicable only to the special case where P=0.
The general equation is E^2 = P^2 * c^2 + m^2 * c^4.
KE = 1/2 * m * v^2 is only valid when v << c.
That is what you say,
It's what is actually observed.
Idiot.
What I say is every single equation that uses a mass,
keep the mass the same and the energy will increase with
speed.
The never grows to infinity unless the energy or speed is inifnite
idiot.
What I state is still fact.
I see you are not grasping such simple facts about how the math
works.


m=1/y*m0
y=sqrt(1-v/c)

Again Jonathan,
1 what?
1 unitless speed of light?
Still not grasping how math works huh?

No, the whole y is unitless, it's a relation between two things with
the same unit, so it doesn't need any. It's like complaining about
the 100 in 100*1mph = 100mph. That doesn't make sense to me.

You can not just remove the units because you devided by
the same amount of them
80 apples devided by 80 apples = ???
1 unitless apple?

No ***.
(even though that math was all crap)
No infinite energy is needed to move a constant mass.
Sheesh.

But m0 equals not m when I don't have the same speed as the mass.

Your speed is irrlevant to the constant mass.
The energy is what changes.
How do you measure mass if you do not measure it
to get a constant mass?



(Of course c and 1 is constant too but someone not knowing this
should finish his 11th grade first).

1 is not a constant.

Well it doesn't change, doesn't it?

You created it from units without proper reason.
It is not constant expecially since the speed of light
is not actually constant.


1 apple
1 automobile
1 dingleberry.
Those are constants.
Those are Scalars.

Not when they stay at 1 unit.
You said 1 is constant so how come adding a unit
makes the 1 now a scalar?

1 is the solution to c/c.

c/c =c
not one.
You can not just call it one and ignore the
units that are part of c to begin with.
Also you should not even be deviding a speed by
a speed without a physical reason.
What is the physical occurance that is telling you
to devide c by c?

Are you doing physics or just playing with abstract math?
If you are doing physics you need physical reasons
for the math.

No,
Your math is saying 1 = 186,000 miles per second.
How does that math work if you think you know how
math works?

Thats what you said.
And indeed 1s=299792458m .

No it does not.
That is how far light will travel in 1 second.
A pendulum that moves for one second
does not move near that far.
so 1 second is a variable of distances if it wants to be.
Again, you are using a constant where there is no constant
1 second is not a constant distance.
and lightspeed is not a constant speed.
Again you are ignoring relative motion only
when it supports the theory?
That is good brainwashing they did to you there.
:)

But I don't have to go that far, because one is now the speed of light
in lightspeeds divided through the unit of lightspeed it's
(299792348m/s)/c it's ridiculously easy.

And ridiculously wrong.
Removing the units via mathematical function without
physical reason at all.
That is pretty sad "physics".


But ... i is imaginary.
They are easy to use and fill in an existing gap.
If you can't use them don't complain about people who do.
The brain was made only for a small part of the universe, so try hard.
That is called imagination.
And you need creativity.
Don't fear to use other peoples imagination.

Why do you fear using my imagination.
If I told you negatives don't exist and said
-5 * -5 = -10 would you attempt to use your imagination
to figure out why?

Here is a specal number line.
f | | | | | | | | 0 | | | | | | | | g
does f *f = g?
what if we looked at it from the other side
g | | | | | | | 0 | | | | | | | | f
does g*g now equal f?

If I asked you to move 100 negative feet away from
me, could you prove you are not 100 positive feet away
from me after you did such?
:)



.

Quantcast