Science > Physics > Energy In The Knowledge Equation 4: p + rho Replaces Mass Density
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"OsherD" |
| Date: |
25 Nov 2005 11:01:50 PM |
| Object: |
Energy In The Knowledge Equation 4: p + rho Replaces Mass Density |
From Osher Doctorow
I typed this about 5 minutes ago and nothing appeared, so I'll
abbreviate it here.
In studying Ribas et al (2005), we can use the fact that in GR p + rho
(the pressure plus energy density) replaces the mass density of the
nonrelativistic equation of hydrostatic equilibrium, the replacement
occurring in the energy-momentum tensor equation:
1) T^(ab) = p eta^(ab) + (p + rho)U^a U^b
(Weinberg 1972, p. 127). Also, in an equation of state such as for
example:
2) p = (1/3)rho
we're using the fact that the dimensions of p and rho are equal:
3) [p] = [F/A] = MLT^(-2)L^(-2) = ML^(-1)T^(-2) = [E/V] = ML^2 T^(-2)
L^(-3) = ML^(-1)T^(-2)
and (3) can be written as the generalized Knowledge Equation with
velocity V and mass M and knowledge K zeroed out in the simplified
form:
4) FLE^(-1) = PI, L = V/A
with PI a dimensionless constant (for example 1/3). For power low
equations of state relating p and rho, we could multiply rho by a
dimensional constant since the power introduces repeated dimensions for
integers, and approximate the dimensional constant by 1 for example.
Osher Doctorow
.
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: Energy In The Knowledge Equation 4: p + rho Replaces Mass Density |
26 Nov 2005 01:09:34 AM |
|
|
"OsherD" <> wrote in message
news:1132979696.158870.327140@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
From Osher Doctorow
I typed this about 5 minutes ago and nothing appeared, so I'll
abbreviate it here.
I read it 5 minutes ago... you seem to be impatient.
As to the content. <shrug>
Androcles.
.
|
|
|
| User: "OsherD" |
|
| Title: Re: Energy In The Knowledge Equation 4: p + rho Replaces Mass Density |
26 Nov 2005 04:39:13 PM |
|
|
From Osher Doctorow
Androcles typed:
I read it 5 minutes ago... you seem to be impatient.
As to the content. <shrug>
Androcles
I seem to be impatient? On my monitor, the first time that either the
first or the second posting appeared was this afternoon, 1PM Pacific
time USA, about 16 hours after the list date of the second posting.
That was after I posted to the "help" section of Google Beta to the
effect that my postings didn't appear. This is about the 10th time
that this has happened in the last 1-2 years.
As for your "shrug" comment, it's about as "wise" as your "impatient"
comment.
Osher Doctorow
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: Energy In The Knowledge Equation 4: p + rho Replaces Mass Density |
27 Nov 2005 12:33:42 AM |
|
|
"OsherD" <> wrote in message
news:1133044753.778678.175510@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
From Osher Doctorow
Androcles typed:
I read it 5 minutes ago... you seem to be impatient.
As to the content. <shrug>
Androcles
I seem to be impatient? On my monitor, the first time that either the
first or the second posting appeared was this afternoon, 1PM Pacific
time USA, about 16 hours after the list date of the second posting.
That was after I posted to the "help" section of Google Beta to the
effect that my postings didn't appear. This is about the 10th time
that this has happened in the last 1-2 years.
As for your "shrug" comment, it's about as "wise" as your "impatient"
comment.
Osher Doctorow
On my monitor both appeared simultaneously. I get no updates
between 6.00 pm and midnight, usenet traffic is of lower priority
than pornographic pictures, the modern opiate of the masses.
Examination of your messages shows "not-for-mail".
The internet is gridlocked, priorities have to be assigned, voice
phone first with higher charges in the working day, free calls on
weekends. Usenet is at the bottom of the totem pole. It's all
about m.o.n.e.y.
If you were to explain in simple English the purpose of your post
perhaps more people would respond.
I have no idea what a "Knowledge Equation 4" is. That sounds like
arrogant pompous ***** to me, so to be polite I shrugged.
Androcles.
.
|
|
|
| User: "OsherD" |
|
| Title: Re: Energy In The Knowledge Equation 4: p + rho Replaces Mass Density |
27 Nov 2005 02:54:13 AM |
|
|
From Osher Doctorow
Androcles typed:
On my monitor both appeared simultaneously. I get no updates
between 6.00 pm and midnight, usenet traffic is of lower priority
than pornographic pictures, the modern opiate of the masses.
Well said! Androcles, you have summarized the modern Protestant Ethic
(other than the Evangelical Protestants). I suspect this is why the
USA is so insistent on keeping the internet under its control.
Osher
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: Energy In The Knowledge Equation 4: p + rho Replaces Mass Density |
27 Nov 2005 05:33:05 AM |
|
|
"OsherD" <> wrote in message
news:1133081653.410227.42780@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
From Osher Doctorow
Androcles typed:
On my monitor both appeared simultaneously. I get no updates
between 6.00 pm and midnight, usenet traffic is of lower priority
than pornographic pictures, the modern opiate of the masses.
Well said! Androcles, you have summarized the modern Protestant Ethic
(other than the Evangelical Protestants). I suspect this is why the
USA is so insistent on keeping the internet under its control.
Osher
The potency of the USA to keeping the internet under control matches
its impotency in keeping anything else under control. A society that
elects its leaders because they have the m.o.n.e.y to get themselves
elected is doomed to eventual failure, following in the footsteps of the
Holy Roman Empire, The Ottoman Empire, the Austro-Hungarian
Empire, the British Empire and the Third Reich. I am not a protestant,
moslem, catholic or branch davidian, I deplore religion in all its forms.
The US constitution guarantees freedom OF religion, not freedom
FROM religion. But anyway, this is a physics forum, my political
and religious views are out of place, I should take them elsewhere
as I tell others to do or be a hypocrite myself. Let's get back to
your ranting about Knowledge Equations and Energy. What the
***** are you babbling about?
Androcles.
.
|
|
|
| User: "OsherD" |
|
| Title: Re: Energy In The Knowledge Equation 4: p + rho Replaces Mass Density |
27 Nov 2005 02:57:20 PM |
|
|
From Osher Doctorow
Androcles typed:
But anyway, this is a physics forum, my political
and religious views are out of place, I should take them elsewhere
as I tell others to do or be a hypocrite myself
I'm continuing in part 5 of this thread. Part 5 should be listed as
the next part on your monitor (unless you're using a time machine :>).
As for why I'm moving to part 5, I don't have to explain since this
isn't a philosophy forum :>)
As for hypocrisy, you're the one who claims that you tell others not to
put political and religious views in a physics forum, not me. You
could either stop telling people that or move to Part 5 where so far I
haven't introduced political or religious views. Or you could take a
long vacation in Israel, where the theoretical physics is usually
better than in the USA. That's not politics or religion but fact.
Osher Doctorow
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "OsherD" |
|
| Title: Re: Energy In The Knowledge Equation 4: p + rho Replaces Mass Density |
26 Nov 2005 05:10:37 PM |
|
|
From Osher Doctorow
I should mention that Androcles seems to have indirectly picked up an
interesting fact subconsciously or otherwise, namely that my postings
on this energy thread are rather limited in scope in each posting, in
contrast with many earlier threads of mine. I think that it has to do
with the nature of energy compared to other variables, for example the
lack of intuitive understanding of energy as compared to force (push,
pull) or length/distance. Even the subdivisions of energy are weird.
While forces tend to retain at least the intuitive ideas of push/pull
or "passing a football" in fermion-boson language (which is less
intuitive by far than push/pull), energy has for example kinetic versus
potential which aren't even in the same ball park.
Osher Doctorow
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: Energy In The Knowledge Equation 4: p + rho Replaces Mass Density |
27 Nov 2005 12:41:33 AM |
|
|
"OsherD" <> wrote in message
news:1133046637.649938.143260@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
From Osher Doctorow
I should mention that Androcles seems to have indirectly picked up an
interesting fact subconsciously or otherwise, namely that my postings
on this energy thread are rather limited in scope in each posting, in
contrast with many earlier threads of mine. I think that it has to do
with the nature of energy compared to other variables, for example the
lack of intuitive understanding of energy as compared to force (push,
pull) or length/distance. Even the subdivisions of energy are weird.
While forces tend to retain at least the intuitive ideas of push/pull
or "passing a football" in fermion-boson language (which is less
intuitive by far than push/pull), energy has for example kinetic versus
potential which aren't even in the same ball park.
Osher Doctorow
Which is fine, but what is it supposed to mean?
Are we to give up our intution?
Are we to contemplate our navels?
Are we to smoke pot or swallow ecstasy?
What the heck is a "lack of intuitive understanding"?
Give a concrete physical example of the purpose of your
energy versus force argument, or whatever it is you are trying to
convey.
Androcles.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
