On Sep 5, 1:45Â am, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Sep 2008 23:01:58 -0700 (PDT), "Y.Porat"
gmail.com> wrote:>>On Sep 4, 1:31Â am, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2 Sep 2008 19:38:28 -0700 (PDT), "Y.Porat"
gmail.com> wrote:>>>>On Sep 3, 3:24Â am, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:
>
>>>>>>I have seen in River wood is floating. And I find Wood always floats
>>>>>>slower than the water.
>
>>>>>>Try an experiment Have a water flow and put some wood. You will see
>>>>>>the wood travels slower than the water carrying it. And never faster
>>>>>>than the water carrying it. I think its due to viscosity of water.
>
>>>>>>Bye
>>>>>>Sanny
>
>>>>> If you accelerate a boat by squirting it with a jet of water from the shore it
>>>>> can never travel faster than the jet.
>
>>>>> However, I analysed this situation mathematically and found that the velocity
>>>>> curve is notthing like the one acquired using the 'gamma mass increase'
>>>>> concept, which is pretty well verified by experiment. Also, it doesn't explain
>>>>> the increasing amount of energy tied up in  charge moving near c.
>
>>>>> MY explanation is that when a charge accelerates between electrodes, it
>>>>> generates a reverse field, which opposes and weakens the applied field.
>>>>> (something like a back emf in vacuum) . Because of the limited speed at which
>>>>> the reverse field can move, it forms a kind of 'bubble' around the charge and a
>>>>> vast amount of energy is tied up in maintaining a reverse field bubble. The
>>>>> maths apparently pretty well matches that of the 'relativistic mass increase'.
>
>
>>>>>>> Tom Roberts
>
>>>>but you overlook the simple fact that
>>>>instead of writing
>
>>>>F=gamma  ma
>>>>you can exactly methematical write
>
>>>>F/Gamm = ma
>>>>**and mass m remains constant*!!
>
>>> So what?
>>----------------
>>you say crap
>
>>lets see where the crap lies :
>
>>i show you that we can put the formula
>
>>F=gamma m a
>>as
>>F/Gamam = m a
>>AND   m  REMAINS CONSTANT !!!
>
>>did you got it into your old crap mind  ??
>
> there is NO 'gamma' ....except in aether theories
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>we are not dealing even with the** physical entity** that is called
>>mass
>
>>it is a mathematical ; argument of INTERPRETATION PHYSICS !!
>>(just another interpretation of the same formula that you agree with
>
>>you never in your crap life  realized that there might be **two
>>legitimate
>>interpretations** of the same formula !!
>>**physical interpretations** not just mathematics  )
>
>>if
>>F = gamma m a  is
>>accepted by you than
>>F/Gamma = m a
>>should also be accepted by you
>>got it  crackparroter  idiot crook ??
>>who gave a crook like you  a Phd degree??
>>a degree  for   f a fucken demagogue .
>
> there is no 'gamma....except in aether theories
> ------------------
who told you that??
the gamma factor was the 'reason' for
the claim that no mass can reach c !!
wile v=c it becomes infinit !!
------------
>> any tome when ever you are pushed to  the corner
>>you will say    crap ??
>>that what will  make you  a productive scientist
>
>>a  REAL  scientist must have some intellectual integrity as well
>>or maybe a fucken  bump parasite ??
>
> Newton's correct equation is: a = F/m
and why not
F=ma ?? as well
just because you say so ??!!
and why not
m=f/a as well??
just ebcause you dismiss it ??
do you thing that while you call another one
a fool based on the above mathematical
private interpretation of the formuls
it makes you a better impressive PHd??
do you think that being an assertive croock
willmake you less a demagogue croock
so Mr idiot PHD
F=ma can be exactly physically the same as
m=F/a as well
and for high velocity the gamma factor
is added as well
got it pompous moron ???!!
and it is the definition od mass
as well as definition of force
as the definition of acceleration .
a amthematical formula in physics
is not just one 'as you like it' definition
so that is something that a crackpotter
croock like you never thought about
keep well (and dont forget to take your pills )
Y.Porat
----------------------
> That is NOT a definition of mass or force no matter how it is written.
> Only an idiot would think it was.
>
>
>
>
>
>>Y.P
>>-----------------------------
