Re: Uh Oh, Discrepancy Alert



Cliff wrote:

On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 01:33:55 GMT, BottleBob <bottlbob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Found that peck of "inertia" yet?
Tell us again what it's supposed to be per the lint ...

I VERY CLEARLY wrote:
[
Be clear, concise & *use your own words*.
Feel free to set some equations before us that show your claimed effect ..

BTW, Why is Newton's "First Law" about motion (and not pecks)?
]

Cliff:

YOU repeatedly refuse to answer simple yes or no questions, but yet
others are supposed to give detailed dissertations upon your request?
LOL

Why do you want someone to 'use their own words', does it give you a
feeling of superiority to twist other's words and engage in sophistry &
rhetoric? Or are you afraid that the inclusion of credible physics
sites will tend to illustrate your basic physics conceptual boo-boos for
all to see?



======================================================================
http://www.chiroweb.com/archives/08/15/14.html

Inertia is not measured directly;

If you cannot measure it how can you (or the lint) claim that it exists?

Don't be silly. Can you "measure" consciousness, being, hate, or the
extent of infinity? Are you now claiming those items don't exist
because they cannot be accurately measured?


it is not said that a body has so many
units of inertia.

No pecks, eh? Giving up?

Inertia is a "principle", haven't I been telling you that for years.


We do say that a body has mass,

Mass is mass.

Which is as circular as it gets (and is pretty much useless as a
definition). Mass has properties; weight in a gravitational field, the
ability to attract other mass, it even has the property of resisting
change in it's motion (this particular property just happens to be
called INERTIA).


and mass is the
quantitative measure of the amount of inertia the body has; thus, mass
measures inertia.

Mass is mass. It "measures" nothing but has measure.

Mass is a measure of inertia. Literally hundreds of educational,
encyclopedia, and physics sites say the same identical thing. I've not
seen even ONE site say otherwise, care to post any that DO?


Inertia is that property of mass that resists (or
opposes) change in a motion state.

We have conservation laws that cover all of that sort of thing.
Did the nuns toss them out?

BTW, IF you had such you could measure it, right? LOL ....

No pecks of consciousness either, I guess it can't exist. LMAO!

======================================================================

======================================================================
http://theory.uwinnipeg.ca/physics/force/node3.html

Definition: Inertia is the tendency of an object to resist any attempt
to change its state of motion. Mass is the force required per unit of
acceleration produced and is a measure of inertia.

F=m*a.
Where is the "inertia" in that?
I see no such term.

Mass is mass. It very clearly has it's own unique units of measure.

You REALLY need to give up on this Google stuff.

BTW, No pecks of "inertia" there either.

You're not paying sufficient attention: Mass is the PHYSICAL MEASURE of
inertia, which is a principle concerning resistance to the change of
motion of a body.


======================================================================

======================================================================
http://www.ncsta.org/reflector/summer04/inertia.html

Inertia is the natural tendency of an object to maintain state of rest
or to remain in uniform motion in a straight line.

This is conservation of momentum. Mass. Vector motion. See
Classical Mechanics & Newton's laws.

Momentum has nothing to do with the tendency of an object to remain at
rest. You have repeatedly confused inertia with momentum. Momentum
doesn't *FORCE* an object to stay in place like you erroneously have
claimed.


It is the fundamental
property of matter where an object opposes being accelerated or
decelerated. Newton related concept of inertia to mass. Initially, he
called mass a quantity of matter, but later redefined it as the measure
of inertia. A more massive object has more inertia i.e., more resistance
to any change in its state of motion than a less massive object.

He was early on & speaking in relation to Galileo's statements and
(probably) the animistic churches.

Probably? Then you're essentially guessing and stating an opinion
based upon your biases and don't really know what he meant, right?


Mass is mass.
In Classical Mechainics E=(m*v^2)/2.
I see no term for "inertia".

That's because mass is the measure of inertia.

Per Einstein E=m*c^2.
I see no term for "inertia".

That's because mass is the measure of inertia.

But then again, you don't seem to even understand that E=mc^2 is the
formula for converting mass units to energy units.

Please answer this question: Can mass be changed/converted into
energy? Yes or No


But in both I do seem to see mass.

That's because mass is the measure of inertia. You've really got to
widen your conceptual understanding of the underlying basic principles
of physics and not get so hung up on simple formulae.


======================================================================

======================================================================
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9051285

mass

in physics, quantitative measure of inertia, a fundamental property of
all matter.

Mass=mass. So what?
You can measure mass but not "inertia" (see above) it seems <G>.

Measuring the mass of an object IS measuring its inertia.

======================================================================

======================================================================
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Physics_Study_Guide/Momentum

Mass (m) : Mass is a measure of inertia. (kg)

From the above "Inertia is not measured directly" &
"it is not said that a body has so many units of inertia."

Kg is a unit of mass.

Right, and mass IS the physical measure of the principle of inertia.

======================================================================


======================================================================
http://www.cord.edu/dept/physics/p128/lecture99_10.html

Inertia is the tendency of an object to remain in constant velocity
motion.

Sounds like momentum & conservation laws .... & Newton's first law
about *motion* ..<G>.

Mass is a measure of inertia.

<Sheesh>
You keep finding bad/poorly written stuff with Google but grasp nothing.

It's a simple concept, I fail to see what your problem is in
understanding it, unless you're just trolling. If someone is unable to
understand the underlying principles of physics all the math in the
world isn't going to be of much benefit since erroneous interpretations
will continually be made.


======================================================================

In the future, please do your OWN homework.

I have no need.

You don't? Who are you trying to kid? Yourself, or others? LMAO!


--
BottleBob
http://home.earthlink.net/~bottlbob
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: No infinite energy needed for lightspeed
    ... That would correspond to the motion reflecting ... W is energy transformation ... means finite mass still. ... Actually I learned classical physics better than the relativistic ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Galilean transformation explanation of MMX
    ... QM describes a quantum object ... and to their inertia, but it does not tell us where the inertia comes ... Formulae don't replace but render an understanding of physics. ... sections as related to the mass creating them. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: No infinite energy needed for lightspeed
    ... That would correspond to the motion reflecting ... W is energy transformation ... means finite mass still. ... Actually I learned classical physics better than the relativistic ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: The Way of the KOOK Was: Looking like wwIII
    ... knowledge of physics? ... Did you miss where even your dictionary definition said inertia was "a ... Momentum we have along ... Momentum always exists for a mass or a photon just as 3D space & time ...
    (alt.machines.cnc)
  • Re: Is Space-Time a Continuum in Reality?
    ... the time is abstracted from motion ... A singularity is a gigantic joke to the entire Universe. ... Just mass and pressure. ... It is clear 'your' physics is not describing accurately what black ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)