Jump to content
Science Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Guadalupe

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling


  • Biography
  • Location
    Laredo, TX.
  • Interests
    Scientific Research
  • Occupation
    Disabled Retired
  1. In Sir Isaac Newton’s time, there was only "force" and something called, “vis viva”. The term “energy” in the modern sense didn’t come about for some years later after his death. It never was a question of lethargic. :cup:
  2. E=mc^2 has no acceleration. F or E=ma has acceleration. So, as you can see, there is no reconciliation. :cup:
  3. Energy is the “main” reason as to why a change occurs on the objects velocity or direction. Depending on the amount of energy will increase or decreases an objects velocity or change its direction. Sir Isaac Newton never knew about the term “energy” in the modern sense. If he did, thing would have been a lot different today. Remember, things change with time and with new discoveries. If we don't update with this new discoveries, we’ll still be working with primitive and out dated tools. :cup:
  4. Below is my latest work in the field of physics. I updated Sir Isaac Newton’s 2nd Law of Motion by replacing force “F” with energy “E”. I call my latest discovery, "Second Law of Motion". Second Law of Motion Second Law of Motion states: The acceleration of a body is parallel and directly proportional to the amount of energy applied. Meaning that energy is the origin by which all things are set in motion. My mathematical formula for the Second Law of Motion is as follows: “Energy equals mass times acceleration or E=ma.” Copyright © 2012
  5. Hi! CraigD :) Your only issue here is with my mathematical formula E=pF and not with the Law of Motion itself. Am I correct? :cup:
  6. Law of Motion Law of Motion states: Energy creates momentum to create force. Without energy, there is no momentum. Without momentum, there is no force. My mathematical formula for the Law of Motion is as follows: "Energy equals Momentum times Force or E=pF." Law of Motion © Copyright & E=pF tm :)
  7. Hi! Turtle :hyper: I remember a similar circumstance with Dr. Benoit Mandelbrot and his new mathematics of fractal geometry. His colleagues (mathematicians) that he respected turn against him and reacted with scorn toward his fractal geometry. Saying that fractal geometry is worthless and that fractal was considered as an artifact of his stupid computing machine, it’s useless and ridiculous. :lol: :lol:
  8. Hi! Turtle :hyper: Hum… Turtle my friend, what exactly is a galupe’s? :lol:
  9. Hi! Turtle Hmm. Here is a question for you. If someone from a prestigious institution, university or even a member of this forums that has a PhD in Mathematics were to concur with my Law of Measurement would it make any difference? :cup:
  10. Hi! Turtle :cup: I’m sorry for not respond to your post #5. I’ve been waiting for the information that may help me better understand modest post #10. So far the information I have gathered has been favorable. All I’m waiting for now is a response from Dr. Ronald Staszkow.
  11. Hi! Moontanman :) You see, it wasn’t really that hard now was it? Thank you. :cup:
  12. Hi! Turtle :) Would you please be so kind enough as to show where I posted such a claim that the mark is a number?
  13. Hi! Moontanman :) I don’t really understand you at all. First, on your post #424, you brought up the biblical texts. Second, on your post # 443, you also brought up the bible into all this as well. Third, on your post #447, you’re saying that it doesn’t matter and you don’t care… Again, my original question to you from you post # 424 is how long is a day in biblical text? :cup:
  14. Hi! Turtle :cup: I never claimed that a mark is a number. But, if you strongly feel that my thread belongs in strange claims. I’ll understand.
  15. Hi! modest :) I’m still waiting to hear from Dr. Ronald Staszkow. When I do, I will return with the answers to your post. Please be patient. :cup:
  • Create New...