| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Mike" |
| Date: |
27 Nov 2005 04:59:08 AM |
| Object: |
Re: Expansion and balloon analogy |
Bilge wrote:
Mike:
It was a puzzle only for morons. Some books stated the AXIOM of
conservation of energy correctly but some other books skipped the
"isolated system" condition.
Oh? Go ahead, prove energy is conserved for any system you define,
without using noether's theorem. First make sure you define
energy unambiguously. Good luck.
First, I have asked you to be a man, not a degenerate, and stop
re-directing posts to alt.morons like a little kid who makes a
mischieve but fears to face the consequences. Wear pants and face the
truth about what you are. You direct to alt.morons because it IS THERE
YOU ACTUALLY BELONG.
you go ahead and learn the basics. Learn for instance that AXIOMS are
not provable propositions. It is just something you accept to be true
because otherwise your world would not make sense.
Noether's theorem is just about symmetries and related conservation AND
NOT about just conservation as many want to extend it to. Conservation
is already built into the Lagrangian. Noether just linked it to the
symmetries. However, the key is that even thge "symmetries" are already
assumed implicitely in the derivation of the Lagrangian. So, from a
deduction POV, Noether's theorem carries no new information. It is just
uncovering OF a hidden premise.
Mike
.
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: Expansion and balloon analogy |
27 Nov 2005 05:59:21 AM |
|
|
"Mike" <eleatis@yahoo.gr> wrote in message
news:1133089148.336837.183240@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Bilge wrote:
Mike:
It was a puzzle only for morons. Some books stated the AXIOM of
conservation of energy correctly but some other books skipped the
"isolated system" condition.
Oh? Go ahead, prove energy is conserved for any system you define,
without using noether's theorem. First make sure you define
energy unambiguously. Good luck.
First, I have asked you to be a man, not a degenerate, and stop
re-directing posts to alt.morons like a little kid who makes a
mischieve but fears to face the consequences. Wear pants and face the
truth about what you are. You direct to alt.morons because it IS THERE
YOU ACTUALLY BELONG.
Why do you even bother with the moron? He's done that for years,
he's not about to grow up.
Androcles.
you go ahead and learn the basics. Learn for instance that AXIOMS are
not provable propositions. It is just something you accept to be true
because otherwise your world would not make sense.
Noether's theorem is just about symmetries and related conservation AND
NOT about just conservation as many want to extend it to. Conservation
is already built into the Lagrangian. Noether just linked it to the
symmetries. However, the key is that even thge "symmetries" are already
assumed implicitely in the derivation of the Lagrangian. So, from a
deduction POV, Noether's theorem carries no new information. It is just
uncovering OF a hidden premise.
Mike
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike" |
|
| Title: Re: Expansion and balloon analogy |
27 Nov 2005 08:45:30 AM |
|
|
Androcles wrote:
"Mike" <eleatis@yahoo.gr> wrote in message
news:1133089148.336837.183240@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Bilge wrote:
Mike:
It was a puzzle only for morons. Some books stated the AXIOM of
conservation of energy correctly but some other books skipped the
"isolated system" condition.
Oh? Go ahead, prove energy is conserved for any system you define,
without using noether's theorem. First make sure you define
energy unambiguously. Good luck.
First, I have asked you to be a man, not a degenerate, and stop
re-directing posts to alt.morons like a little kid who makes a
mischieve but fears to face the consequences. Wear pants and face the
truth about what you are. You direct to alt.morons because it IS THERE
YOU ACTUALLY BELONG.
Why do you even bother with the moron? He's done that for years,
he's not about to grow up.
Androcles.
I guess you right. There is no point in doing that. I won't argue with
him any more. Just tell'em he is a moron. :)
Mike
you go ahead and learn the basics. Learn for instance that AXIOMS are
not provable propositions. It is just something you accept to be true
because otherwise your world would not make sense.
Noether's theorem is just about symmetries and related conservation AND
NOT about just conservation as many want to extend it to. Conservation
is already built into the Lagrangian. Noether just linked it to the
symmetries. However, the key is that even thge "symmetries" are already
assumed implicitely in the derivation of the Lagrangian. So, from a
deduction POV, Noether's theorem carries no new information. It is just
uncovering OF a hidden premise.
Mike
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: Expansion and balloon analogy |
27 Nov 2005 10:14:26 AM |
|
|
"Mike" <eleatis@yahoo.gr> wrote in message
news:1133102730.281920.37480@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Androcles wrote:
"Mike" <eleatis@yahoo.gr> wrote in message
news:1133089148.336837.183240@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Bilge wrote:
Mike:
It was a puzzle only for morons. Some books stated the AXIOM of
conservation of energy correctly but some other books skipped the
"isolated system" condition.
Oh? Go ahead, prove energy is conserved for any system you define,
without using noether's theorem. First make sure you define
energy unambiguously. Good luck.
First, I have asked you to be a man, not a degenerate, and stop
re-directing posts to alt.morons like a little kid who makes a
mischieve but fears to face the consequences. Wear pants and face the
truth about what you are. You direct to alt.morons because it IS THERE
YOU ACTUALLY BELONG.
Why do you even bother with the moron? He's done that for years,
he's not about to grow up.
Androcles.
I guess you right. There is no point in doing that. I won't argue with
him any more. Just tell'em he is a moron. :)
Mike
Has it occured to you that he doesn't want a reply?
He thinks he has a victory by having the last word.
If nobody replies to him, he will have succeeded.
I wish him every success, he'll have nobody to
converse with. Then he'll either ***** or start
a thread of his own which we can redirect to alt.moron.
It's quite easy, go to Google groups, select "show options",
"Reply", "Add follow up header". I never read his *****,
he's been killfiled for a long time.
A.
you go ahead and learn the basics. Learn for instance that AXIOMS are
not provable propositions. It is just something you accept to be true
because otherwise your world would not make sense.
Noether's theorem is just about symmetries and related conservation AND
NOT about just conservation as many want to extend it to. Conservation
is already built into the Lagrangian. Noether just linked it to the
symmetries. However, the key is that even thge "symmetries" are already
assumed implicitely in the derivation of the Lagrangian. So, from a
deduction POV, Noether's theorem carries no new information. It is just
uncovering OF a hidden premise.
Mike
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bilge" |
|
| Title: Re: Expansion and balloon analogy |
27 Nov 2005 10:46:18 AM |
|
|
Mike, the random character generator, posted:
Bilge wrote:
Mike:
It was a puzzle only for morons. Some books stated the AXIOM of
conservation of energy correctly but some other books skipped the
"isolated system" condition.
Oh? Go ahead, prove energy is conserved for any system you define,
without using noether's theorem. First make sure you define
energy unambiguously. Good luck.
First, I have asked you to be a man, not a degenerate,
You could save some typing if you waited until you had a reason
to ask.
and stop
re-directing posts to alt.morons like a little kid who makes a
Start posting something relevant to this newsgroup and save yourself
the tantrum:
mischieve but fears to face the consequences. Wear pants and face the
truth about what you are. You direct to alt.morons because it IS THERE
YOU ACTUALLY BELONG.
Why do you care what I'm wearing when I post? Some sort of
bizarre newsgroup fetish?
you go ahead and learn the basics. Learn for instance that AXIOMS are
not provable propositions.
GADZOOKS! Who would have known?
It is just something you accept to be true
because otherwise your world would not make sense.
And one of those axioms is that you never post anything that
makes sense, the world does make sense.
Noether's theorem is just about symmetries and related conservation AND
NOT about just conservation as many want to extend it to. Conservation
OK, so what you're telling me is that you refuse to answer the
question and prefer shovelling *****. That's ok, since the
question was rhetorical. I really didn't expect you to be able
post anything but ***** and you lived up to my expectations.
is already built into the Lagrangian. Noether just linked it to the
symmetries. However, the key is that even thge "symmetries" are already
assumed implicitely in the derivation of the Lagrangian. So, from a
deduction POV, Noether's theorem carries no new information. It is just
uncovering OF a hidden premise.
Mike
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike" |
|
| Title: Re: Expansion and balloon analogy |
27 Nov 2005 11:27:56 AM |
|
|
Bilge wrote:
[snip crap]
Why do you care what I'm wearing when I post? Some sort of
bizarre newsgroup fetish?
I do not. You should care. Pretending to be a man while you behavior
shows otherwise must be of concern to you.
Mike
.
|
|
|
| User: "G=EMC^2 Glazier" |
|
| Title: Re: Expansion and balloon analogy |
29 Nov 2005 09:04:35 AM |
|
|
Balloon analogy N G Raisin bread analogy gives rise to good thinking.
Bert
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
