Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

What Is Mass?

mass

  • Please log in to reply
140 replies to this topic

#103 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1528 posts

Posted 04 August 2017 - 02:25 PM

Everything has mass. Gravity, time, mass, these are not universally quantifiable in continuous spacetime.

Now, people seem to be under the impression that spacetime is discrete. Which is like the Achilles tortoise argument, but that is an inherently flawed stance to take. Reality isn't partially here.

Edited by Super Polymath, 04 August 2017 - 02:28 PM.


#104 antoine

antoine

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 92 posts

Posted 04 August 2017 - 02:31 PM

There are levels to it, you separate or quantify when you use math I.e. e=mc^2. However, charge is like mass, gravity is universal, & the term mass can be requantified to include charge.

Well now I am in silly claims, I suppose I can make claims. 

 

 

E=mq²=G


Edited by antoine, 04 August 2017 - 02:32 PM.


#105 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8946 posts

Posted 04 August 2017 - 02:38 PM

In all due respect, if I am misinterpreting the information , please correct the misinterpretation, I can't see why you would use that against me?


We have been correcting your "misinterpretation" dear. You keep alternately dismissing it and ignoring it.

That's pretty much the opposite of having any respect for us whatsoever.  That's why many here are led to conclude you're just an asshole and doing it all on purpose.

But here's another try, and I'll even use your own analogy from above:

 

You think it is a silly claim that 1=1? 1=0 would be a silly claim .


First to clarify the issue at hand, you've ignored multiple explanations that it is not the math, it's the mapping of your math to the physical world.

 

So, of course "1 = 1" is uncontroversial, and if that was all you were saying, no one would notice or care.

 

Second, here's the problem redescribed: you are comparing two attributes that have nothing to do with one another, so to go back to your example of putting apples in a box, I'd ask:

 

If I put two apples in a box, what color are they?

 

Your insistence on "1 mass = 1 charge" is exactly like insisting that the only answer to this question is "the 2 apples are always red."

 

Of course, we've got green apples and yellow apples and red-green apples and I can even point you to varieties that are purple.

 

Now you've demonstrated some notion of what properties are: an elephant is neither the same size as a mouse nor does it have fur, although both are grey.

 

Thus you have also demonstrated that you sort of understand that not all properties are correlated, although quite frankly I expected you to say "an elephant is the same as a mouse because they are both gray."

 

So the bottom line is you're saying over and over and over ad nauseum that mass is perfectly correlated with charge, which just ain't so. I even gave you an example above with protons and electrons.

 

And yet you still didn't get it.

 

So we're back to this same silly issue of your insisting on a relationship where there really is none, in any interpretation of the words.

 

And the math has nothing to do with it.

 

We're left with very few interpretations of what your problem is: a learning disability, a effect of psychosis, or just being an asshole.

 

Quite frankly as a mom, I do worry you need some significant help. The rest of the folks here just think you're an asshole.

 

Because we have a rule against annoying our members, you may be banned like you have everywhere else. But I urge you to seek help from a professional before you even try to post again.

 

But be forewarned: our practice is to leave this stuff here forever as a warning sign and we don't have much control about people identifying you elsewhere.  

 

 

We are all here on earth to help others; what on earth the others are here for I don't know, :phones:

Buffy



#106 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1528 posts

Posted 04 August 2017 - 02:43 PM

http://www.pbs.org/w...-or-continuous/

#107 antoine

antoine

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 92 posts

Posted 04 August 2017 - 02:53 PM

[ bandwidth and tree-saving repeat of post deleted ]

Ok, I must agree then that I have some learning difficultly , so you are going to discriminate me and ban me because of this? 

 

P.s I have just posted your reply on a political forum. I am asking for political invention of science forums.    Discriminate to almost racist proportions. 


Edited by Buffy, 04 August 2017 - 03:41 PM.


#108 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1528 posts

Posted 04 August 2017 - 02:57 PM

Relatively, energy is the same as mass when a subatomic collection of matter is zoomed & scaled up to the size of the observable universe. From that perspective our universe would be the size of itself multiplied by itself nigh-infinite times, R^R if R = our Hubble radius.

#109 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1528 posts

Posted 04 August 2017 - 02:58 PM

Ok, I must agree then that I have some learning difficultly , so you are going to discriminate me and ban me because of this?

lol

#110 antoine

antoine

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 92 posts

Posted 04 August 2017 - 03:08 PM

Thank you for at least trying to have a discussion, unlike the one way discussion the members want on this forum.



#111 antoine

antoine

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 92 posts

Posted 04 August 2017 - 03:11 PM

Relatively, energy is the same as mass when a subatomic collection of matter is zoomed & scaled up to the size of the observable universe. From that perspective our universe would be the size of itself multiplied by itself nigh-infinite times, R^R if R = our Hubble radius.

Yes energy is mass and 

 

Kmax=c0efbb5b854cd77c8e02a069d69d41b9.gif

 

I suspect our conversation will be cut short by a ban. 



#112 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8946 posts

Posted 04 August 2017 - 03:58 PM

Ok, I must agree then that I have some learning difficultly....


I don't know. Do you? I'm just asking a question here and you jump all over me and call me a racist.

so you are going to discriminate me and ban me because of this?


No, quite likely we won't because we'd lose our credibility for tolerance if we did. Plus since you seem to get significant satisfaction from your disdain of sites that ban you, we want to avoid providing that to you. We'll probably annoy you more by not banning you.


P.s I have just posted your reply on a political forum. I am asking for political invention of science forums.    Discriminate to almost racist proportions.


Oh thank you for sending traffic our way! :cheer:

We love satisfied customers talking about us.

Now I have no idea, but given your apparent feelings of entitlement, I'm betting you're a white male, which most sociologists would say is a group that by definition cannot claim to suffer from "racism."

As to discrimination, as I've mentioned many times here in reply to you, as a private forum, you have no "freedom of speech" here and you certainly have no freedom from ridicule.

As any perusing of our forums will indicate, we're actually far more tolerant than most forums, and the mere fact that you're still here is proof of it.

Now it's of course interesting that you once again have ignored what I have said in my last post that does indeed respond to your issues and make an attempt to engage you, and yet you insist that it's all "one way discussion the members want on this forum."

So go ahead. Try to read what I said and respond to it. If you respond by screaming "discrimination!" again we get yet another proof point that it's you that is insisting on "one way discussion." Oh well. That'll be your legacy.

As for me, I'm kind of a pit bull. I don't give up easily... :cheer:


Don't look for it, Taylor. You may not like what you find. :phones:
Buffy

#113 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1528 posts

Posted 04 August 2017 - 04:36 PM

Yes energy is mass and 
 
K[/size]max=[/size]c0efbb5b854cd77c8e02a069d69d41b9.gif
 
I suspect our conversation will be cut short by a ban.

This forum is a place to collate my ToE concepts. In order to fashion a model I need to teach myself some terms & pertinent calc concepts as my model doesn't touch anything beyond 3D concepts, not even time would be thought of as its own dimension in my concepts.

I intend to take that model to It From Qubits.

#114 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1528 posts

Posted 04 August 2017 - 04:36 PM

https://www.simonsfo...nd-information/

#115 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1528 posts

Posted 04 August 2017 - 05:05 PM

I think if Einstein had lived a little longer he would have came to the same conclusions as I have. After all, he never cosigned the quantum interpretation made on the double slit experiment. Who knows what conclusions he came to on his death bed?

#116 antoine

antoine

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 92 posts

Posted 04 August 2017 - 05:24 PM

We have been correcting your "misinterpretation" dear. You keep alternately dismissing it and ignoring it.

That's pretty much the opposite of having any respect for us whatsoever.  That's why many here are led to conclude you're just an ******* and doing it all on purpose.

But here's another try, and I'll even use your own analogy from above:

 


First to clarify the issue at hand, you've ignored multiple explanations that it is not the math, it's the mapping of your math to the physical world.

 

So, of course "1 = 1" is uncontroversial, and if that was all you were saying, no one would notice or care.

 

Second, here's the problem redescribed: you are comparing two attributes that have nothing to do with one another, so to go back to your example of putting apples in a box, I'd ask:

 

If I put two apples in a box, what color are they?

 

Your insistence on "1 mass = 1 charge" is exactly like insisting that the only answer to this question is "the 2 apples are always red."

 

Maybe I was wrong about this forum and the members and moderators.  My apologies, when I see the word ban I 'see' red because I do not believe in anyway that I am offensive.  

 

You asked, if you put two apples in a box, what colour are they ,  they are what colour we observe them to be.  

 

Maybe apples was a bad example. 

 

 

If we have an empty box and added 6 electrons and 6 protons to the box.

 

 

How many individual charges will there be in the box? 

 

How many individual masses will there be in the box?


Edited by antoine, 04 August 2017 - 05:28 PM.


#117 antoine

antoine

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 92 posts

Posted 04 August 2017 - 05:26 PM

Good goals.



#118 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8946 posts

Posted 07 August 2017 - 12:00 PM

Maybe I was wrong about this forum and the members and moderators.  My apologies, when I see the word ban I 'see' red because...


:cheer:

 

...I do not believe in anyway that I am offensive.


We know. But no matter.
 

You asked, if you put two apples in a box, what colour are they ,  they are what colour we observe them to be.


Well, Erwin Schrödinger had much to say about that.

You seem to have missed the point of course, which is about the concept of "correlation."

I posited that you would find correlation between "apples" and "red," but in this case you did not.

What's interesting about your answer here is that you seem to believe that it's an issue of *perception*, not measurable reality.

So given that you say that people might perceive the color differently, might you also grant that some people would see no charge where you see a great deal?
 

Maybe apples was a bad example.


I think it's a splendid example with lots of possibilities, but we don't need to stay there if you don't want to.
 

If we have an empty box and added 6 electrons and 6 protons to the box.
 
How many individual charges will there be in the box? 
 
How many individual masses will there be in the box?

"Individual" is the problem here. The word has only a colloquial meaning in science, and is not exacting enough to prove anything.

I know you're likely to be nonplussed by that assertion, but bear with me for a moment.

As a practical matter, if you throw 6 protons and 6 electrons into a perfect vacuum box with perfectly chargeless walls (we ignore that this is a practical impossibility for now), it's most likely that in a very short time, you'd end up with 6 hydrogen atoms with no externally measurable "charge." And given some way to locate "masses" you might find 6 "individual masses."

 

Now if you were able to reduce yourself and your equipment down to sub-atomic size, you *might* be able to measure the positive and negative charges in there, but you probably wouldn't like the after-effects.

 

But really, for all intents and purposes the answer to your question is: 6 masses, no measurable charge.

 

I've now read through some of your posts on this topic on a couple of other sites, and it appears that everyone you engage with tries to explain to you that "the charges aren't 'individual'" except at scales which don't influence the effect you're trying to conjure.

 

It seems all of them have given up after some length of time. 

 

If you perceive this as proving you are "right" about this, I'm not sure that anyone can disabuse you of this fundamental misunderstanding of how physics works.

 

Do you have an open mind? Most of the observers I see would answer that you don't. You might try to be a bit more open about how the world actually works.

 

 

Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one, :phones:

Buffy



#119 Farming guy

Farming guy

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 966 posts

Posted 08 August 2017 - 07:38 AM

Ok, I must agree then that I have some learning difficultly , so you are going to discriminate me and ban me because of this? 

 

P.s I have just posted your reply on a political forum. I am asking for political invention of science forums.    Discriminate to almost racist proportions. 

Is it a "learning difficulty" , or is it a refusal to learn?  When you believe you already have the answer, why ask the question?  Is it some bastardization of the Socratic method?

 

Well, now that you ave pointed the political forums at this site, I'm sure they will fix everything just as nicely as the rest of the internet.


Edited by Farming guy, 08 August 2017 - 07:38 AM.




Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: mass