Print

[_iffy]

N

[jha'dhur]

QUOTE(_iffy @ May 7 2006, 01:20 PM)

Jha... your not confusing force with inertia are you? Inertia acts like a force, but it isn't real.

BTW - both the ball and person have an FN

Inertia is the force that causes you to continue to move forward, when you turn the wheel of your car hard left.

That is "very" real.  

QUOTE

No....the ball doesnt "have" force.....
Force is an action.....
the ball has energy

Dumbass

Energy is a force * displacemnt

Hence (ft-lbf) or N - m

What a MA ROON!!!!

[_iffy]

QUOTE(jha'dhur @ May 7 2006, 01:35 PM)

Inertia is the force that causes you to continue to move forward, when you turn the wheel of your car hard left.
That is "very" real.

That's momentum. Inertia is different. It's not real

[lordvader129]

QUOTE

2. An 2-kg object is moving horizontally with a speed of 4 m/s. How much net force is required to keep the object moving at this speed and in this direction?

QUOTE

Answer: 0 N

An object in motion will maintain its state of motion. The presence of an unbalanced force changes the velocity of the object.

[jha'dhur]

QUOTE(_iffy @ May 7 2006, 01:37 PM)

That's momentum. Inertia is different. It's not real

QUOTE

inertia (n.) The tendency of a body to resist acceleration; the tendency of a body at rest to remain at rest or of a body in straight line motion to stay in motion in a straight line unless acted on by an outside force.

QUOTE

momentum (n.) A measure of the motion of a body equal to the product of its mass and velocity. Also called linear momentum

So, I guess if I was to post the mathematical expression for inertia then what would you say?

Iffy, you are fun to chat with but you have very little credebility when it comes to real world facts.

1) Accelerator Gold Bullsh*t

2) Hiroshima Nagaski

3) Inertia Isnt real

4) Counting atoms

P.S. I did some research it is possible to transmutate platinum atoms to stable gold on a very, very ,very small (atom per atom) scale but nowhere near even a gram amount, plus this is only possible in nuclear reactor not accelerator due to precursors need born from fission events.

 

QUOTE(lordvader129 @ May 7 2006, 01:45 PM)

http://www.glenbrook...laws/u2l1b.html

scroll donw and check question number 2

Given, the fact you helped me out yesterday and I declared a truce as result I will not point out the flaw in your logic.

[_iffy]

QUOTE

inertia (n.) The tendency of a body to resist acceleration; the tendency of a body at rest to remain at rest or of a body in straight line motion to stay in motion in a straight line unless acted on by an outside force.

It's not real. It's not a force. It's a way to describe acts of motion.

QUOTE(jha'dhur @ May 7 2006, 01:48 PM)

So, I guess if I was to post the mathematical expression for inertia then what would you say?

I would say the inertia isn't a force.

QUOTE(jha'dhur @ May 7 2006, 01:48 PM)

Iffy, you are fun to chat with but you have very little credebility when it comes to real world facts.

1) Accelerator Gold Bullsh*t

2) Hiroshima Nagaski

3) Inertia Isnt real

4) Counting atoms

1) i gave you a link from a credible source that proved this
2)wasn't me
3)it isn't a force. It is a way to decribe whats happening. It isn't real.
4)wasn't me. (unless your refering to a particle accelerator adding individual electrons, in which case - proven already)

QUOTE(jha'dhur @ May 7 2006, 01:48 PM)

P.S. I did some research it is possible to transmutate platinum atoms to stable gold on a very, very ,very small (atom per atom) scale but nowhere near even a gram amount, plus this is only possible in nuclear reactor not accelerator due to precursors need born from fission events.

Cooooool. Doesn't say you can't make gold in a particle accelerator though.

QUOTE(jha'dhur @ May 7 2006, 01:48 PM)

Iffy, you are fun to chat with

[jha'dhur]

QUOTE(_iffy @ May 7 2006, 02:05 PM)

It's not real. It's not a force. It's a way to describe acts of motion.
I would say the inertia isn't a force.

1) i gave you a link from a credible source that proved this

A "credible" non-technical website with such crap on it as loch ness and bigfoot. If you were to scroll down in the BOGUS article you will see what everyone on that forum had to say of the "spammer" that wrote your "credible" source  

QUOTE(_iffy @ May 7 2006, 02:05 PM)

3)it isn't a force. It is a way to decribe whats happening. It isn't real.

According to you, right.

QUOTE(_iffy @ May 7 2006, 02:05 PM)

Cooooool. Doesn't say you can't make gold in a particle accelerator though.
 

The particular isotope of platinum(that can be transmutated to gold) is only created from fission(i.e nuclear reactor)  

Inertia at work.



Looks pretty real to me, ask Princess Diana if inertia is a "force"

[_iffy]

QUOTE(jha'dhur @ May 7 2006, 02:27 PM)

A "credible" non-technical website with such crap on it as loch ness and bigfoot. If you were to scroll down in the BOGUS article you will see what everyone on that forum had to say of the "spammer" that wrote your "credible" source  

The source was the nobel prize official website! wtf!?! How is that not credible?

[Chook]

You need to give up this arguement with some idiot non-com guy.  If he is just doing "research" ie google, and not understanding or willing to take the fact that he may be wrong.  You won't get to him, just give it up for now and do things more important.

[PhatIrishBastard]

QUOTE(Chook @ May 8 2006, 01:23 AM)

You need to give up this arguement with some idiot non-com guy.  If he is just doing "research" ie google, and not understanding or willing to take the fact that he may be wrong.  You won't get to him, just give it up for now and do things more important.

You and your imaginary friend are amusing. I didnt know that had PC's at the group home. Isnt that against the RENT a Center terms.

 

QUOTE(puckSR @ May 7 2006, 02:42 PM)

Of course...dont mention the voyager probe to him.....
the Voyager probe has been moving for 20 years without any propellant force....and is continuing to move rather steadily in deep space
This is really sad jha'dhur....
if you would like to know why I think your xmedia?
Xmedia did the same thing...he argued physics with me for a month.....

Dummy, Voyager is in SPACE.

Microgravity, microdrag, same force balances valid just different magnitude of contributors.


You sure are FUCKING obssesed with Xmedia........

But Puck, it does read like your xmedia ramblings, just repeating same old bolgna over and over.

YOU ARE MISTAKEN

[puckSR]

QUOTE

YOU ARE MISTAKEN

For the record....what am i mistaken about?
constant velocity constant masses have no force?  
F=ma is used for more than modeling free-fall?
the derivative of a constant is 0?

Please....what am I wrong about???

Voyager has had forces acting upon it during its travel....the point of mentioning voyager is to explain that micro-gravity is not equivalent to drag.  Gravity can serve both to accelerate and decelerate an object....depending on the relative position to the object.
I am trying to make the point to jha'dhur about force....
Force accelerates objects....force doesnt "keep objects moving" unless a great deal of force is acting on the object in resistance.

You already mentioned "free body diagrams" so I know you know that F=ma is used for more than modeling freefall.  You could contribute to the conversation and tell jha'dhur this fact....but instead your arguing with me and you dont even know what we are arguing about.

Im arguing with jha'dhur on very specific points...
He has shown in inadequate knowledge of mathematics and physics...
You keep trying to point out small problems with my analogies...which i wouldnt mind if I wasnt arguing with a certified idiot on the other side.