| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Don1" |
| Date: |
14 Aug 2005 06:47:16 PM |
| Object: |
Mass; force, and rates of displacement |
There are four fundamental concepts in physics; from which virtually
all of the others can be derived: The concept of constant mass consists
of three variables, force (f), displacement (s) and (periods of) time
(t); where a body's mass is the quantity of matter, and inertia that it
contains.
ONE unit of mass is comprised of one unit of force (f), divided by the
rate of forced displacement (s/t^2) that it causes: Or more concisly:
ft^2/s is a constant, for any given body, anywhere; anytime.
It follows, that two units of mass consist of two units of force,
divided by the rate of forced motion that they cause; three units of
mass consist of the rate of forced motion that they cause, etc, etc . .
..
Don
.
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Mass; force, and rates of displacement |
14 Aug 2005 07:11:10 PM |
|
|
No Shead--force, and rates of displacement are not fundamental,
but made up of some of the fundamental quantities.
Ref: http://physics.nist.gov./cuu/Units/units.html
The foundation of the International System of Units (SI) rest
upon seven (7) base quantities: length, mass, time, electric current,
temperature, luminous intensity and amount of substance. In turn,
they give rise to seven base units: the meter, the kilogram, the
second, the ampere, the kelvin, the candela and the mole.
From these base units, other units are derived to express physical
quantities, such as area, density, volume, power, force, magnetic flux,
energy, and so on.
1. meter is the length of the path of light in a vacuum during the
interval of 1/299 792 458 seconds.
2. kilogram - international prototype.
3. second - duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of radiation
corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels
of the ground state of the cesium-133 atom.
4. ampere is that constant current which, if maintained in two
straight parallel conductors of infinite length, of negligible
circular cross section, and placed 1 meter apart in a vacuum,
would produce between these conductors a force equal to 2 x 10^-7
newtons per meter of length.
5. kelvin - 1/273.16 of the thermodynamic temperature of the
triple point of water.
6. candela is the luminous intensity, in a given direction, of a
source that emits monochromatic radiation of frequency 540 x 10^12
hertz and that has a radiant intensity in that direction of 1/683
watts per steradian.
7. mole - amount of a substance of a system which contains as many
elementary entities as there are atoms in 0.012 kilogram of
carbon 12.
There are definitions of supplementary units: radian and steradian.
So there you have it, Shead, the bases of our measurement units.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Mass; force, and rates of displacement |
15 Aug 2005 08:38:33 AM |
|
|
Sam Wormley wrote:
No Shead--force, and rates of displacement are not fundamental,
but made up of some of the fundamental quantities.
Ref: http://physics.nist.gov./cuu/Units/units.html
The foundation of the International System of Units (SI) rest
upon seven (7) base quantities: length, mass, time, electric current,
temperature, luminous intensity and amount of substance. In turn,
they give rise to seven base units: the meter, the kilogram, the
second, the ampere, the kelvin, the candela and the mole.
From these base units, other units are derived to express physical
quantities, such as area, density, volume, power, force, magnetic flux,
energy, and so on.
But Sam: Isn't it true that,in terms of <<defining units>>, the base
quantities and units are mass (kilogram), frequency (Hertz), velocity
(metre/second) and electric current (Ampere)? Things like charge and
time can only be derived using formulas like Time = 1/Frequncy, d = vt,
etc.
Isn/t that why all the Physics 101 lab experiments on "Velocity of
Light" had to be relabelled "Clock/Measuring Tape Calibration
Experiment"?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Mass; force, and rates of displacement |
15 Aug 2005 08:41:58 AM |
|
|
wrote:
But Sam: Isn't it true that,in terms of <<defining units>>, the base
quantities and units are mass (kilogram), frequency (Hertz), velocity
(metre/second) and electric current (Ampere)? Things like charge and
time can only be derived using formulas like Time = 1/Frequncy, d = vt,
etc.
No
Isn/t that why all the Physics 101 lab experiments on "Velocity of
Light" had to be relabelled "Clock/Measuring Tape Calibration
Experiment"?
No
.
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: Mass; force, and rates of displacement |
15 Aug 2005 12:20:38 PM |
|
|
explain " due to " Sam
Internal mass and G mass are the same thing. Not end of story.
=A0=A0The center of gravity and the center of mass .. if are boath the
same point the atom wont move.. But if they are not at the same point
then the atom will move .
=A0=A0F--MA where F is the distance from the center of mass to the
center of
G. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
=A0=A0The center of G is off center if the atoms parts are in an
elipical orbit. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
=A0=A0Sam wrote all he knew ::]
Re: Weight =3D mass x g
From (Sam=A0Wormley)
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Start with F =3D ma. There is no distinction about the
mass. =A0 Inertial mass and gravitational mass are one in the same. =A0
Weight is simply F =3D ma where the a is acceleration due to =A0 gravity
of say the Earth for example. End of story!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "T Wake" |
|
| Title: Re: Mass; force, and rates of displacement |
15 Aug 2005 02:59:53 AM |
|
|
"Don1" <dcshead@charter.net> wrote in message
news:1124063236.659906.240770@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
There are four fundamental concepts in physics; from which virtually
all of the others can be derived: The concept of constant mass consists
of three variables, force (f), displacement (s) and (periods of) time
(t); where a body's mass is the quantity of matter, and inertia that it
contains.
ONE unit of mass is comprised of one unit of force (f), divided by the
rate of forced displacement (s/t^2) that it causes: Or more concisly:
ft^2/s is a constant, for any given body, anywhere; anytime.
It follows, that two units of mass consist of two units of force,
divided by the rate of forced motion that they cause; three units of
mass consist of the rate of forced motion that they cause, etc, etc . .
Not only do you specialise in circular logic but you re-post things thinking
slight changes to your wordings will sneak them past people.
This has been debated to death Don. Why do you feel the need to go back to
the start?
.
|
|
|
| User: "tadchem" |
|
| Title: Re: Mass; force, and rates of displacement |
15 Aug 2005 04:31:38 AM |
|
|
"T Wake" <taswakeAt@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:lp6dnWjvHZYf1p3eRVnyvQ@pipex.net...
<SNIP>
Not only do you specialise in circular logic but you re-post things
thinking
slight changes to your wordings will sneak them past people.
This has been debated to death Don. Why do you feel the need to go back to
the start?
sHead has never gotten *past* the start.
Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don1" |
|
| Title: Re: Mass; force, and rates of displacement |
15 Aug 2005 06:49:53 AM |
|
|
tadchem wrote:
"T Wake" <taswakeAt@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:lp6dnWjvHZYf1p3eRVnyvQ@pipex.net...
<SNIP>
Not only do you specialise in circular logic but you re-post things
thinking
slight changes to your wordings will sneak them past people.
This has been debated to death Don. Why do you feel the need to go back to
the start?
sHead has never gotten *past* the start.
Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA
What you jokers can't seem to admit is that the metric SI units aren't
the fundamental variables of physics; of which there are only three,
force (f), displacement (s) and (periods of) time (t); where a body's
mass is the quantity of matter, and inertia that it contains.
The SI units were designed to facilitate standard quantities for the
international trading of goods and services, and they can't get that
right.
Physics is the science of force and motion, where force and weight, and
the forced displacements they cause is foremost.
Don
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Mass; force, and rates of displacement |
15 Aug 2005 07:08:05 AM |
|
|
Don1 wrote:
What you jokers can't seem to admit is that the metric SI units aren't
the fundamental variables of physics; of which there are only three,
force (f), displacement (s) and (periods of) time (t); where a body's
mass is the quantity of matter, and inertia that it contains.
Just because Donald Shead doesn't understand the rational for
the scientific community's choice of fundamental *quantities*
doesn't make everybody else wrong.
Hell, Donald, you can't even sort out the concepts of mass
and inertia. Shead right and everybody else wrong... is not
a very convincing argument.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don1" |
|
| Title: Re: Mass; force, and rates of displacement |
15 Aug 2005 08:01:06 AM |
|
|
Sam Wormley wrote:
Don1 wrote:
What you jokers can't seem to admit is that the metric SI units aren't
the fundamental variables of physics; of which there are only three,
force (f), displacement (s) and (periods of) time (t); where a body's
mass is the quantity of matter, and inertia that it contains.
Just because Donald Shead doesn't understand the rational for
the scientific community's choice of fundamental *quantities*
doesn't make everybody else wrong.
What is the rational of charge? Isn't a full charge like a full
reservoir of water, where the pressure is the potential force
available? Isn't the mole just an amount of matter; some fraction of
mass?
Hell, Donald, you can't even sort out the concepts of mass
and inertia.
Who can't? Haven't I been telling you that inertia is the quantity of
mass, and is expressed in units of mass as slugs, grams and kilograms?
Shead right and everybody else wrong... is not
a very convincing argument.
When a system allows using units of mass to express weight, and vice
versa, something's wrong with that system. Am I the only one who sees
this?
Don
.
|
|
|
| User: "Herman Trivilino" |
|
| Title: Re: Mass; force, and rates of displacement |
16 Aug 2005 09:45:12 PM |
|
|
"Don1" <dcshead@charter.net> wrote ...
What is the rational of charge?
Convienience. Just like mass, distance, time, and force.
Isn't a full charge like a full.
reservoir of water, where the pressure is the potential force
available?
No.
Isn't the mole just an amount of matter; some fraction of
mass?
Essentially, yes, the mole is an amount of matter. But, no, it's not a
fraction of mass.
When a system allows using units of mass to express weight, and vice
versa, something's wrong with that system. Am I the only one who sees
this?
No. A lot of us see it.
What separates us from you is that you don't understand it. And I have to
say that, based on years of conversation with you, you probably never will.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Mass; force, and rates of displacement |
15 Aug 2005 08:25:01 AM |
|
|
Don1 wrote:
Haven't I been telling you that inertia is the quantity of
mass, and is expressed in units of mass as slugs, grams and kilograms?
You have been saying something to that effect, however, inertia
isn't a physical quantity that has units. Perhaps you are confusing
inertia with moment of inertia.
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/MomentofInertia.html
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Inertia.html
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Schoenfeld" |
|
| Title: Re: Mass; force, and rates of displacement |
15 Aug 2005 08:07:20 AM |
|
|
Don1 wrote:
Sam Wormley wrote:
Don1 wrote:
What you jokers can't seem to admit is that the metric SI units aren't
the fundamental variables of physics; of which there are only three,
force (f), displacement (s) and (periods of) time (t); where a body's
mass is the quantity of matter, and inertia that it contains.
Just because Donald Shead doesn't understand the rational for
the scientific community's choice of fundamental *quantities*
doesn't make everybody else wrong.
What is the rational of charge? Isn't a full charge like a full
reservoir of water, where the pressure is the potential force
available? Isn't the mole just an amount of matter; some fraction of
mass?
Hell, Donald, you can't even sort out the concepts of mass
and inertia.
Who can't? Haven't I been telling you that inertia is the quantity of
mass, and is expressed in units of mass as slugs, grams and kilograms?
Shead right and everybody else wrong... is not
a very convincing argument.
When a system allows using units of mass to express weight, and vice
versa, something's wrong with that system. Am I the only one who sees
this?
Don
CRASH COURSE IN PHYSICS:
In physics there are 5 fundamental units:
TABLE 1 - Fundamental Units:
NAME DIMENSION SI EQUIVALENT
------------------------------------------------------------
Planck time Time (T) 5.39121 * 10-44 s
Planck length Length (L) 1.61624 * 10-35 m
Planck mass Mass (M) 2.17645 * 10-8 kg
Planck charge Electric charge (Q) 1.87555 * 10-18 C
Planck temp. Temperature (Tp) 1.41679 * 10-32 K
All remaining physical units can be derived as:
TABLE 2 - Derived Units:
NAME DIMENSIONS SI EQUIVALENT
------------------------------------------------------------
Planck energy M L^2 / T^2 1.9561 * 10-9 J
Planck force M L / T^2 1.2103 * 10-44 N
Planck power M L^2 / T^3 3.6283 * 10-52 W
Planck density M / L^3 5.1550 * 10-96 kg/m^3
Planck angular freq. 1 / T 1.8549 * 10-43 s^(-1)
Planck pressure M / (L T^2) 4.6331 * 10-113 Pa
Planck current Q / T 3.4789 * 10-25 A
Planck voltage M L^2/(T^2 Q) 1.0430 * 10-27 V
Planck impedance M L^2/(T Q^2) 2.9979 * 10-1 Ohms
All dimensionful physcal constants can be defined as:
TABLE 3 - Fundamental Constants:
NAME SYMBOL EXPRESSION
------------------------------------------------------------
Light speed c L / T
Dirac h-bar M L^2 / T
Gravitational G L^3 / ( M T^2)
Space permittivity e0 M L^2 / (4 pi M L^3)
Boltzmann k M L^2 / (T^2 Tp)
Fundamental quantities arise in physics:
TABLE 4 - Fundamental Quantities:
NAME SYMBOL SI EQUIVALENT
----------------------------------------
Natural charge e 1.6021 x 10-19 C
It has been found that a dimensionless physical constant arises in
nature:
TABLE 5 - Dimensionless Constants:
NAME SYMBOL EXPRESSION VALUE
-----------------------------------------------------
alpha a (e / Q)^2 7.2973 x 10-3
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Mass; force, and rates of displacement |
15 Aug 2005 07:16:22 AM |
|
|
Don1 wrote:
tadchem wrote:
"T Wake" <taswakeAt@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:lp6dnWjvHZYf1p3eRVnyvQ@pipex.net...
<SNIP>
Not only do you specialise in circular logic but you re-post things
thinking
slight changes to your wordings will sneak them past people.
This has been debated to death Don. Why do you feel the need to go back to
the start?
sHead has never gotten *past* the start.
Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA
What you jokers can't seem to admit is that the metric SI units aren't
the fundamental variables of physics; of which there are only three,
force (f), displacement (s) and (periods of) time (t); where a body's
mass is the quantity of matter, and inertia that it contains.
The SI units were designed to facilitate standard quantities for the
international trading of goods and services, and they can't get that
right.
Physics is the science of force and motion, where force and weight, and
the forced displacements they cause is foremost.
Don
CRASH COURSE IN PHYSICS:
In physics there are 5 fundamental units:
TABLE 1 - Fundamental Units:
NAME DIMENSION SI EQUIVALENT
------------------------------------------------------------
Planck time Time (T) 5.39121 * 10-44 s
Planck length Length (L) 1.61624 * 10-35 m
Planck mass Mass (M) 2.17645 * 10-8 kg
Planck charge Electric charge (Q) 1.87555 * 10-18 C
Planck temp. Temperature (Tp) 1.41679 * 1032 K
All remaining physical units can be derived as:
TABLE 2 - Derived Units:
NAME DIMENSIONS SI EQUIVALENT
------------------------------------------------------------
Planck energy M L^2 / T^2 1.9561 * 10-9 J
Planck force M L / T^2 1.2103 * 10-44 N
Planck power M L^2 / T^3 3.6283 * 10-52 W
Planck density M / L^3 5.1550 * 10-96 kg/m^3
Planck angular freq. 1 / T 1.8549 * 10-43 s^(-1)
Planck pressure M / (L T^2) 4.6331 * 10-113 Pa
Planck current Q / T 3.4789 * 10-25 A
Planck voltage M L^2/(T^2 Q) 1.0430 * 10-27 V
Planck impedance M L^2/(T Q^2) 2.9979 * 10-1 Ohms
All dimensionful physcal constants can be defined as:
TABLE 3 - Fundamental Constants:
Constant SYMBOL EXPRESSION
------------------------------------------------------------
Light speed c L / T
Dirac h-bar M L^2 / T
Gravitational G L^3 / ( M T^2)
Space permittivity e0 M L^2 / (4 pi M L^3)
Boltzmann k M L^2 / (T^2 Tp)
Fundamental quantities arise in physics:
TABLE 4 - Fundamental Quantities:
NAME SYMBOL SI EQUIVALENT
----------------------------------------
Natural charge e 1.6021 x 10-19 C
It has been found that a dimensionless physical constant arises in
nature:
TABLE 5 - Dimensionless Constants:
NAME SYMBOL EXPRESSION VALUE
-----------------------------------------------------
alpha a (e / Q)^2 7.2973 x 10-3
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Schoenfeld" |
|
| Title: Re: Mass; force, and rates of displacement |
14 Aug 2005 08:06:51 PM |
|
|
Don1 wrote:
There are four fundamental concepts in physics; from which virtually
all of the others can be derived: The concept of constant mass consists
of three variables, force (f), displacement (s) and (periods of) time
(t); where a body's mass is the quantity of matter, and inertia that it
contains.
ONE unit of mass is comprised of one unit of force (f), divided by the
rate of forced displacement (s/t^2) that it causes: Or more concisly:
ft^2/s is a constant, for any given body, anywhere; anytime.
It follows, that two units of mass consist of two units of force,
divided by the rate of forced motion that they cause; three units of
mass consist of the rate of forced motion that they cause, etc, etc . .
.
Don
In physics there are 5 fundamental units:
TABLE 1 - Fundamental Units:
NAME DIMENSION SI EQUIVALENT
------------------------------------------------------------
Planck time Time (T) 5.39121 =D7 10-44 s
Planck length Length (L) 1.61624 =D7 10-35 m
Planck mass Mass (M) 2.17645 =D7 10-8 kg
Planck charge Electric charge (Q) 1.87555 =D7 10-18 C
Planck temp. Temperature (Tp) 1.41679 =D7 1032 K
All other physical units can be derived as:
TABLE 2 - Derived Units:
NAME DIMENSIONS SI EQUIVALENT
------------------------------------------------------------
Planck energy M L^2 / T^2 1.9561 =D7 109 J
Planck force M L / T^2 1.2103 =D7 1044 N
Planck power M L^2 / T^3 3.6283 =D7 1052 W
Planck density M / L^3 5.1550 =D7 1096 kg/m^3
Planck angular freq. 1 / T 1.8549 =D7 1043 s^(-1)
Planck pressure M / (L T^2) 4.6331 =D7 10113 Pa
Planck current Q / T 3.4789 =D7 1025 A
Planck voltage M L^2/(T^2 Q) 1.0430 =D7 1027 V
Planck impedance M L^2/(T Q^2) 2.9979 =D7 101 Ohms
All dimensionful physcal constants can be defined as:
TABLE 3 - Fundamental Constants:
Constant SYMBOL EXPRESSION
------------------------------------------------------------
Light speed c T / L
Dirac h-bar M L^2 / T
Gravitational G L^3 / ( M T^2)
Space permittivity e0 M L^2 / (4 pi M L^3)
Boltzmann k M L^2 / (T^2 Tp)
Fundamental quantities arise in physics:
TABLE 4 - Fundamental Quantities:
NAME SYMBOL SI EQUIVALENT
----------------------------------------
Natural charge e 1.6021 x 10-19 C
It has been found that a dimensionless physical constant arises in
nature:
TABLE 5 - Dimensionless Constants:
NAME SYMBOL EXPRESSION VALUE
-----------------------------------------------------
alpha a (e / Q)^2 7.2973 x 10-3
.
|
|
|
| User: "Schoenfeld" |
|
| Title: Re: Mass; force, and rates of displacement |
14 Aug 2005 08:32:54 PM |
|
|
Schoenfeld wrote:
TABLE 3 - Fundamental Constants:
Constant SYMBOL EXPRESSION
------------------------------------------------------------
Light speed c T / L
Typo: should be L/T
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
