Education Forums
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Jeckyl
Guest
|
 Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 11:01 am Post subject: Re: The Big Bang--another proofe of photons having mass!! |
 |
|
"Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182568857.080197.156350@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: |
On Jun 22, 12:23 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:
"Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182499653.194465.299260@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
what gives the energy the ability to create
mass while it 'does not have mass ' ??
I'd say the same thing that lets annihilated mass generate energy - eg in
an
nuclear reactors.
-----------
in the nuclar reaction
you HAVE MASS
so you claime that
mass disappeared??
|
Yes .. and energy created
| Quote: |
or do you claime that
Enery **is not composed of sub
physical entites** ??
|
AFAIK Energy is not composed of sub physical entities .. although I'm not
really sure what you mean by "sub physical entities". However, I don't think
it would be, any more than velocity is, or electrical charge, or frequency,
or distance etc.
| Quote: |
if so why not create
a **new physics SYTEM* that has jsut one
physical entity=== ENERGY ??
and thats all ??
because the
big Bang shows that
**all our physical
enetities **and being --
started just by energy !!!
|
Because energy and mass are different things .. even though there is a
linear relationship between them. Similar to the way energy and frequency
are not the same, but are related by E = hf |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Y.Porat
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 6:41 pm Post subject: Re: The Big Bang--another proofe of photons having mass!! |
|
|
On Jun 23, 1:48 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
"Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182568857.080197.156350@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 22, 12:23 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:
"Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182499653.194465.299260@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
what gives the energy the ability to create
mass while it 'does not have mass ' ??
I'd say the same thing that lets annihilated mass generate energy - eg in
an
nuclear reactors.
-----------
in the nuclar reaction
you HAVE MASS
so you claime that
mass disappeared??
Yes .. and energy created
or do you claime that
Enery **is not composed of sub
physical entites** ??
AFAIK Energy is not composed of sub physical entities .. although I'm not
really sure what you mean by "sub physical entities". However, I don't think
it would be, any more than velocity is, or electrical charge, or frequency,
or distance etc.
|
very nice
you are getting closer !
now you say velocity righ
so velocity of WHAT ??!!
of withes on a broom ??
dont you realise of understand that velociy by itsef
is meaningless uless it is atatched to
some meaurable entity
so wqht is that mesurable entity
that i smoving ?
now you say distance
very well
how doyou detect disatnce
between what to what ??
brween one phton to another ??
while at the first satgether are only photons?
and actually you could not neglect
distatnce as being a component
even at he moment of BB
because if there is no distance
the universe cannt expand !!
morover
if there is no dsitance there is no movenet as well
so we managed to extarct form you that
energy is composed of some sun physical entityies
now we are stillwith the question about
how is it that this energy was composed of
dsiatnce and movement
suddenly created mass ?? (masive particles ??)
from waht
from the disatnce or may be of
the velocity it had ??
is it good enough to create mass ??
comon kekye!
who not shorten our mutaul aggony
and suggest that
energy is
mass in motion ??
a crazy idea
doyou know from where i scrached that crazy idea
from my crazy mind
or may be
FROM MACROCOSM ????
TIA
Y.Porat
--------------------
| Quote: |
if so why not create
a **new physics SYTEM* that has jsut one
physical entity=== ENERGY ??
and thats all ??
because the
big Bang shows that
**all our physical
enetities **and being --
started just by energy !!!
Because energy and mass are different things .. even though there is a
linear relationship between them. Similar to the way energy and frequency
are not the same, but are related by E = hf- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text - |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Pmb
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 9:40 pm Post subject: Re: The Big Bang--another proofe of photons having mass!! |
|
|
"Jeckyl" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:467cfa98$0$1186$61c65585@un-2park-
| Quote: |
Because energy and mass are different things .. even though there is a
linear relationship between them. Similar to the way energy and frequency
are not the same, but are related by E = hf.
|
Very nice insight! Those are my exact sentiments on that point!
Pete |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Jeckyl
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 4:15 am Post subject: Re: The Big Bang--another proofe of photons having mass!! |
|
|
"Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182606061.202056.84580@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: |
On Jun 23, 1:48 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:
"Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182568857.080197.156350@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 22, 12:23 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:
"Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182499653.194465.299260@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
what gives the energy the ability to create
mass while it 'does not have mass ' ??
I'd say the same thing that lets annihilated mass generate energy - eg
in
an
nuclear reactors.
-----------
in the nuclar reaction
you HAVE MASS
so you claime that
mass disappeared??
Yes .. and energy created
or do you claime that
Enery **is not composed of sub
physical entites** ??
AFAIK Energy is not composed of sub physical entities .. although I'm not
really sure what you mean by "sub physical entities". However, I don't
think
it would be, any more than velocity is, or electrical charge, or
frequency,
or distance etc.
very nice
you are getting closer !
now you say velocity righ
so velocity of WHAT ??!!
of withes on a broom ??
dont you realise of understand that velociy by itsef
is meaningless
|
No its not. That an object may have velocity doesn't mean velocity
comprises objects, you're talking nonsense.
| Quote: |
uless it is atatched to
some meaurable entity
so wqht is that mesurable entity
that i smoving ?
now you say distance
very well
how doyou detect disatnce
between what to what ??
brween one phton to another ??
while at the first satgether are only photons?
and actually you could not neglect
distatnce as being a component
even at he moment of BB
because if there is no distance
the universe cannt expand !!
morover
if there is no dsitance there is no movenet as well
so we managed to extarct form you that
energy is composed of some sun physical entityies
|
No
| Quote: |
now we are stillwith the question about
how is it that this energy was composed of
dsiatnce and movement
suddenly created mass ?? (masive particles ??)
from waht
from the disatnce or may be of
the velocity it had ??
is it good enough to create mass ??
comon kekye!
who not shorten our mutaul aggony
and suggest that
energy is
mass in motion ??
a crazy idea
doyou know from where i scrached that crazy idea
from my crazy mind
or may be
FROM MACROCOSM ????
|
You're a loony , poor rat |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Jeckyl
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 4:16 am Post subject: Re: The Big Bang--another proofe of photons having mass!! |
|
|
"Pmb" <someon@somewhere.net> wrote in message
news:sImdnRnQEriZ0ODbnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@comcast.com...
| Quote: |
"Jeckyl" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:467cfa98$0$1186$61c65585@un-2park-
Because energy and mass are different things .. even though there is a
linear relationship between them. Similar to the way energy and
frequency are not the same, but are related by E = hf.
Very nice insight! Those are my exact sentiments on that point!
|
Thanks  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Y.Porat
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 8:08 am Post subject: Re: The Big Bang--another proofe of photons having mass!! |
|
|
On Jun 23, 7:40 pm, "Pmb" <som...@somewhere.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
"Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:467cfa98$0$1186$61c65585@un-2park-
Because energy and mass are different things .. even though there is a
linear relationship between them. Similar to the way energy and frequency
are not the same, but are related by E = hf.
Very nice insight! Those are my exact sentiments on that point!
Pete
-------------- |
energy and frequency are not the same
yet ............
force and mass are not the same
(did i say it is ??? that is demagogism .)
yet do you say that
force is not F=mass times acceleration ??
you ddint get the point :
Energfy i s not a single physical entity
it is a composition of entites
so in order of being more practical
pleaee tell us what are according to you
the sunconsituents
of Energy ??
btw
haver you ever heared that
E=mc^2 ???
TIA
Y.Porat
-------------- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Y.Porat
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 11:06 am Post subject: Re: The Big Bang--another proofe of photons having mass!! |
|
|
On Jun 24, 2:15 am, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
"Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182606061.202056.84580@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 23, 1:48 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:
"Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182568857.080197.156350@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 22, 12:23 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:
"Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182499653.194465.299260@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
what gives the energy the ability to create
mass while it 'does not have mass ' ??
I'd say the same thing that lets annihilated mass generate energy - eg
in
an
nuclear reactors.
-----------
in the nuclar reaction
you HAVE MASS
so you claime that
mass disappeared??
Yes .. and energy created
or do you claime that
Enery **is not composed of sub
physical entites** ??
AFAIK Energy is not composed of sub physical entities .. although I'm not
really sure what you mean by "sub physical entities". However, I don't
think
it would be, any more than velocity is, or electrical charge, or
frequency,
or distance etc.
very nice
you are getting closer !
now you say velocity righ
so velocity of WHAT ??!!
of withes on a broom ??
dont you realise of understand that velociy by itsef
is meaningless
No its not. That an object may have velocity doesn't mean velocity
comprises objects, you're talking nonsense.
uless it is atatched to
some meaurable entity
so wqht is that mesurable entity
that i smoving ?
now you say distance
very well
how doyou detect disatnce
between what to what ??
brween one phton to another ??
while at the first satgether are only photons?
and actually you could not neglect
distatnce as being a component
even at he moment of BB
because if there is no distance
the universe cannt expand !!
morover
if there is no dsitance there is no movenet as well
so we managed to extarct form you that
energy is composed of some sun physical entityies
No
now we are stillwith the question about
how is it that this energy was composed of
dsiatnce and movement
suddenly created mass ??
|
just naswer that
(masive particles ??)
| Quote: |
from what
from the disatnce or may be of
the velocity it had ??
|
and your answer ??
| Quote: |
is it good enough to create mass ??
comon kekye!
who not shorten our mutaul aggony
and suggest that
energy is
mass in motion ??
a crazy idea
doyou know from where i scrached that crazy idea
from my crazy mind
or may be
FROM MACROCOSM ????
You're a loony , poor rat- Hide quoted text -
|
and you are a a crook that is ashames to reveal
you real fucken name
it is
Bjoern Ferbacher from Hedelberg
you have good reasons to be a shamed
your University is ashamed of you as well !!
and that is why you don tget a day job !!
and sit al day next to this ng shtting it
with your disturbed bunp parasit leeching
---------
oommon the Nazi shit Geobeless pupil is pushed to
the crner he starts to kick in the air
and loos his hypocritic temper !!!
INSTEAD OF TALKING PHYSICS
mr Gebelles
we ar e not alone here in that discussion
there a r eat least hundreds of people wahching us
you cant cheat all of them
by your siturbed nazi shit atickes
just speak physics
and leave all your personal shit to
Joesef Gebeless your spititual; tescher !!
and jsut tell us
what is the aprticle that can exist at the temperature of
10 ^19 Gev !! 9Temperature is given there
in terms of Gev)
and yoh call youself a Qm educated
waht is that
'The Plank epoch' that is noted there ???!!
at 10^19 Gev
'Planck epoch' i s it not the E=hf ?? epoch ??
only at 10 ^3 Gev elecreoweak phase comes
particle desert' is only
between 10^15 and 10^3 Gev !!
got it nazi shit ?? demagogue and obfuscator
----
doyou think that all the readers ar eidiot
dsiturbed imbecils like you ??
that you can cheat them forever by
demagogic trickes ?? ??
Y,Porat
--------------- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Y.Porat
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 11:06 am Post subject: Re: The Big Bang--another proofe of photons having mass!! |
|
|
On Jun 24, 6:08 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jun 23, 7:40 pm, "Pmb" <som...@somewhere.net> wrote:> "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:467cfa98$0$1186$61c65585@un-2park-
Because energy and mass are different things .. even though there is a
linear relationship between them. Similar to the way energy and frequency
are not the same, but are related by E = hf.
Very nice insight! Those are my exact sentiments on that point!
Pete
--------------
energy and frequency are not the same
yet ............
force and mass are not the same
(did i say it is ??? that is demagogism .)
yet do you say that
force is not F=mass times acceleration ??
you ddint get the point :
Energfy i s not a single physical entity
it is a composition of entites
so in order of being more practical
pleaee tell us what are according to you
the sunconsituents
of Energy ??
btw
haver you ever heared that
E=mc^2 ???
TIA
Y.Porat
--------------
|
Mr Pmb
what is that 'm' in the formula
E=m c^2 ??
the question is not to th eNasi shit jekyle
that is ashamed to reveal his realname
and rightly so !!)
TIA
Y.Porat
------------- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Pmb
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 11:07 am Post subject: Re: The Big Bang--another proofe of photons having mass!! |
|
|
"Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182654520.546114.129600@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: |
On Jun 23, 7:40 pm, "Pmb" <som...@somewhere.net> wrote:
"Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:467cfa98$0$1186$61c65585@un-2park-
Because energy and mass are different things .. even though there is a
linear relationship between them. Similar to the way energy and
frequency
are not the same, but are related by E = hf.
Very nice insight! Those are my exact sentiments on that point!
Pete
--------------
energy and frequency are not the same
yet ............
|
Correct.
| Quote: |
force and mass are not the same
|
Correct
| Quote: |
(did i say it is ??? that is demagogism .)
yet do you say that
force is not F=mass times acceleration ??
|
Actually F = dp/dt where p = mv (Force is the time rate of change of
momentum)
| Quote: |
you ddint get the point :
Energfy i s not a single physical entity
it is a composition of entites
so in order of being more practical
pleaee tell us what are according to you
the sunconsituents
of Energy ??
|
That iss rather involved question. For that purpose I created this web page
http://www.geocities.com/physics_world/mech/what_is_energy.htm
| Quote: |
btw
haver you ever heared that
E=mc^2 ???
|
Yep. And here is a derivation of it
http://www.geocities.com/physics_world/sr/mass_energy_equiv.htm
Pete |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Pmb
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 11:07 am Post subject: Re: The Big Bang--another proofe of photons having mass!! |
|
|
"Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182665734.506904.310920@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: |
On Jun 24, 6:08 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 23, 7:40 pm, "Pmb" <som...@somewhere.net> wrote:> "Jeckyl"
n...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:467cfa98$0$1186$61c65585@un-2park-
Because energy and mass are different things .. even though there is
a
linear relationship between them. Similar to the way energy and
frequency
are not the same, but are related by E = hf.
Very nice insight! Those are my exact sentiments on that point!
Pete
--------------
energy and frequency are not the same
yet ............
force and mass are not the same
(did i say it is ??? that is demagogism .)
yet do you say that
force is not F=mass times acceleration ??
you ddint get the point :
Energfy i s not a single physical entity
it is a composition of entites
so in order of being more practical
pleaee tell us what are according to you
the sunconsituents
of Energy ??
btw
haver you ever heared that
E=mc^2 ???
TIA
Y.Porat
--------------
Mr Pmb
what is that 'm' in the formula
E=m c^2 ??
|
Inertial (aka relativistic) mass
Pete |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Y.Porat
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 6:29 pm Post subject: Re: The Big Bang--another proofe of photons having mass!! |
|
|
On Jun 24, 1:16 pm, "Pmb" <som...@somewhere.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
"Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182665734.506904.310920@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 24, 6:08 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 23, 7:40 pm, "Pmb" <som...@somewhere.net> wrote:> "Jeckyl"
n...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:467cfa98$0$1186$61c65585@un-2park-
Because energy and mass are different things .. even though there is
a
linear relationship between them. Similar to the way energy and
frequency
are not the same, but are related by E = hf.
Very nice insight! Those are my exact sentiments on that point!
Pete
--------------
energy and frequency are not the same
yet ............
force and mass are not the same
(did i say it is ??? that is demagogism .)
yet do you say that
force is not F=mass times acceleration ??
you ddint get the point :
Energfy i s not a single physical entity
it is a composition of entites
so in order of being more practical
pleaee tell us what are according to you
the sunconsituents
of Energy ??
btw
haver you ever heared that
E=mc^2 ???
TIA
Y.Porat
--------------
Mr Pmb
what is that 'm' in the formula
E=m c^2 ??
Inertial (aka relativistic) mass
|
No Mr PMB
there is jsut one kind of mass
no elativistic
even th eidot Jekyle admitted that
and if there is jsut one
than the
m in m c^2 is invariant mass !!
2
you still ddint explain how is it in the Big bng
tht pure energy produces mass
*waht are the components of enery
according toyou
je kyle alradt agreed about lenght
(he has no chice or else her would be
more idiot than he already is
now he agreed about some motion
ok
that is lenth and time
now can you produce mass
from a physicalentity that is composed of lenth and time
only??
hint dont you think that some basic entity is
MISSING THER in the understanding of
the honest genious from Hedelberg
that invented the :Fertz idea '
and ;super fetz as well ??
so that genious already agreed about the existanc of
movement and length
so amy be you can help him to find the other
missing physical entity
is iy so difficult
or may be some psychologic problems ???
do you beleive that a semi intelligent person
like him
did alrwady realized it
but refuseds to admit it for
persnal anymousily reasons ???
TIA to PMB
Y.Porat
-----------------
------------------
> |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Jeckyl
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:37 pm Post subject: Re: The Big Bang--another proofe of photons having mass!! |
|
|
"Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182654520.546114.129600@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: |
On Jun 23, 7:40 pm, "Pmb" <som...@somewhere.net> wrote:
"Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:467cfa98$0$1186$61c65585@un-2park-
Because energy and mass are different things .. even though there is a
linear relationship between them. Similar to the way energy and
frequency
are not the same, but are related by E = hf.
Very nice insight! Those are my exact sentiments on that point!
Pete
--------------
energy and frequency are not the same
|
No, they aren't
| Quote: |
yet ............
force and mass are not the same
|
No, they aren't
| Quote: |
(did i say it is ??? that is demagogism .)
|
Who said you did?
| Quote: |
yet do you say that
force is not F=mass times acceleration ??
|
Yes
| Quote: |
you ddint get the point :
|
You don't have one
| Quote: |
Energfy i s not a single physical entity
|
Yes .. it is
| Quote: |
it is a composition of entites
|
No .. its not
| Quote: |
so in order of being more practical
pleaee tell us what are according to you
the sunconsituents
of Energy ??
|
Energy is energy. .. it doesn't have constituents.
It DOES have units, of course
But Energy itself no more has mass as a "constituent" than it has area (even
though it has square metres in its units) or inverse-square-seconds.
| Quote: |
btw
haver you ever heared that
E=mc^2 ???
|
That is the formula for rest energy of an object at rest with rest mass m |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Jeckyl
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:41 pm Post subject: Re: The Big Bang--another proofe of photons having mass!! |
|
|
"Pmb" <someon@somewhere.net> wrote in message
news:LMCdna9wM4IE2ePbnZ2dnUVZ_rWnnZ2d@comcast.com...
| Quote: |
"Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182665734.506904.310920@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
Mr Pmb
what is that 'm' in the formula
E=m c^2 ??
Inertial (aka relativistic) mass
Pete
|
Actually .. not QUITE right (if one is picky)
Generally, 'm' refers to invariant rest mass .. not inertial mass. Big 'M'
is usually used for that (or just explicitly written with gamma).
So E_0 = mc^2 gives rest energy of an object at rest, where m = invariant
rest mass.
And E = M c^2 gives total energy of a moving object, where M = gamma . m =
inertial mass, and m = invariant rest mass |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Jeckyl
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:51 pm Post subject: Re: The Big Bang--another proofe of photons having mass!! |
|
|
"Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182665314.385649.162780@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: |
On Jun 24, 2:15 am, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:
now we are stillwith the question about
how is it that this energy was composed of
dsiatnce and movement
|
What do you mean .. distance and movement?
| Quote: |
suddenly created mass ??
just naswer that
(masive particles ??)
|
We know energy is created from the annihilation of matter with mass, and
matter with mass can be created from using energy.
see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_creation
| Quote: |
from what
from the disatnce or may be of
the velocity it had ??
and your answer ??
|
I don't know what you're asking here.
| Quote: |
is it good enough to create mass ??
comon kekye!
who not shorten our mutaul aggony
and suggest that
energy is
mass in motion ??
a crazy idea
doyou know from where i scrached that crazy idea
from my crazy mind
or may be
FROM MACROCOSM ????
You're a loony , poor rat- Hide quoted text -
and you are
.... |
[snip poor rat's continued delusions and nazi insults .. what a sad pathetic
old man] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Jeckyl
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 8:02 pm Post subject: Re: The Big Bang--another proofe of photons having mass!! |
|
|
"Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182691788.975431.191210@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: |
On Jun 24, 1:16 pm, "Pmb" <som...@somewhere.net> wrote:
Mr Pmb
what is that 'm' in the formula
E=m c^2 ??
Inertial (aka relativistic) mass
No Mr PMB
there is jsut one kind of mass
no elativistic
even th eidot Jekyle admitted that
and if there is jsut one
than the
m in m c^2 is invariant mass !!
|
As I said in my reply to him .. in that formula, E is rest energy, m is rest
mass
You need the gamma factor in there for a moving object to work out the total
energy
| Quote: |
2
you still ddint explain how is it in the Big bng
tht pure energy produces mass
*waht are the components of enery
according toyou
je kyle alradt agreed about lenght
|
No .. I didn't
| Quote: |
(he has no chice or else her would be
more idiot than he already is
now he agreed about some motion
|
No .. I didn't
| Quote: |
ok
that is lenth and time
now can you produce mass
from a physicalentity that is composed of lenth and time
only??
hint dont you think that some basic entity is
MISSING THER in the understanding of
the honest genious from Hedelberg
that invented the :Fertz idea '
and ;super fetz as well ??
|
Who?
| Quote: |
so that genious already agreed about the existanc of
movement and length
|
They exist .. but they aren't "consisituents" of Energy.
One can only say that the units of length and time and mass make up the
units for energy.
| Quote: |
so amy be you can help him to find the other
missing physical entity
is iy so difficult
or may be some psychologic problems ???
do you beleive that a semi intelligent person
like him
did alrwady realized it
but refuseds to admit it for
persnal anymousily reasons ???
|
What nonsense are you on about now? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
97 Attacks blocked
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
