|
Author
|
Topic: How did round planets form from the explosion of the Big Bang?
|
Sasuke
Member (Idle past 5185 days) Posts: 137 Joined: 08-21-2009
|
|
Message 81 of 156 (543566)
01-19-2010 7:14 AM
|
Reply to: Message 80 by Admin
01-19-2010 6:53 AM
|
|
Re: Please Get On-Topic
Percy, that thread is closed..
"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with you all. Amen." Sasuke!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 80 by Admin, posted 01-19-2010 6:53 AM | | Admin has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 82 by Larni, posted 01-19-2010 7:22 AM | | Sasuke has seen this message but not replied | | | Message 83 by Huntard, posted 01-19-2010 7:23 AM | | Sasuke has seen this message but not replied | | | Message 84 by Admin, posted 01-19-2010 7:24 AM | | Sasuke has seen this message but not replied |
|
Sasuke
Member (Idle past 5185 days) Posts: 137 Joined: 08-21-2009
(2)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 86 of 156 (543610)
01-19-2010 6:17 PM
|
Reply to: Message 85 by Rahvin
01-19-2010 12:31 PM
|
|
Re: E=MC(Einstein, 1879-1955).
Rahvin, I was tired last night but I believe mass is D*V, that's what I ment anyway. I also think the problem with considering mass to be energy is that matter its self has no capacity to do work its just simply inanimate. I can see the point cavediver is making though I still fill like matter is simply taking energy and binding it with chemicals or atomic particles that make it inanimate in the form of matter. I will also admit that it does not matter what I think at this point as this is more of a hobby than it is something I really care about. I will read through this thread until I am able to really understand what cavediver is saying so that maybe I can present either a better argument or I agree. -Thanks for the help... Edited by Sasuke, : clarity Edited by Sasuke, : clarity
"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with you all. Amen." Sasuke!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 85 by Rahvin, posted 01-19-2010 12:31 PM | | Rahvin has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 89 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-20-2010 11:07 AM | | Sasuke has seen this message but not replied |
|
Sasuke
Member (Idle past 5185 days) Posts: 137 Joined: 08-21-2009
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Re: mass has energy
Catholic Scientist, Subatomic particles(protons, neutrons, electrons) come together to form different types of bonds. These bonds form matter. In these bonds the energy is being used to form these bonds. So therefor the capacity to do work is being used at the moment. Since energy is defined as the "capacity to do work" matter can't be energy because the energy in the atoms of matter at the moment is being used to form these different types of bonds/matter. Break the bond/NOT THE MATTER = Release the energy. P.S. cavediver, could you correct me if I am incorrect. I've read all your posts and even reviewed some Chemistry books from previous courses to make sure I got that all right. 
"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with you all. Amen." Sasuke!
|
Sasuke
Member (Idle past 5185 days) Posts: 137 Joined: 08-21-2009
|
Re: mass has energy
Catholic Scientist, Actually they are not different although I will admit post 92 is a lot more true than post 86... You also have to understand that I studied it a lot inbetween those posts..........
"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with you all. Amen." Sasuke!
|
Sasuke
Member (Idle past 5185 days) Posts: 137 Joined: 08-21-2009
|
Re: mass has energy
Catholic Scientist,
CS writes: I think breaking the bonds is the matter doing work. I guess it depends on how you perceive "capacity to do work". However, if matter is inanimate I don't see it having a capacity to do work. The way I look at energy is while its stimulating not while it needs to be stimulated. stimulating = capacity, not stimulating = no capacity.
"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with you all. Amen." Sasuke!
|
Sasuke
Member (Idle past 5185 days) Posts: 137 Joined: 08-21-2009
|
Re: mass has energy
CS,
CS writes: I would say destroying a city is a lot of work... (atomic bomb).
Energy is required in order to break the bonds to release more energy. It is not something that is just done inanimately. Gasoline does not burn without fire or some kind of force/energy. This is true for all matter. However, energy is simply stimulation. Matter is simply no stimulation. Matter is simply not energy cus it = 0 stimulation. The point is, energy = stimulation.
CS writes: Inanimate? A glass of water's molecules are moving all over the place. Due to vibrations that are external to water. Again another case of energy/stimulation. Matter its self is inanimate.
CS writes: When you say that something inanimate cannot do work you seem to be suggesting that because a rock can't mow the lawn then it doesn't have energy... "doing work" is not just manual labor
The idea behind, capacity to do work, is that there is a limit to how much something can stimulate something else.. When you turn on a vibrator and you stick it in a glass of water, how long does it last? Well typically vibrators have batteries. When these batteries die the capacity to do work is gone.(yes I realize the batteries can now be used for something else and when they are done being used there, then to the next thing, and so on.. but it is still stimulation.. energy is stimulation..) The capacity to do work is limited to the ability to stimulate something else..
cs writes: A stick of dynamite can do a whole lot of work but you gotta light it first. Exactly. Energy is momentum. Matter has no momentum unless energy gives it momentum.
"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with you all. Amen." Sasuke!
|
Sasuke
Member (Idle past 5185 days) Posts: 137 Joined: 08-21-2009
|
Re: mass has energy
DA, this momentum you speak of is gravity and it occured in the moment of the BB. This BB is the initial vibration/force/energy...
"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with you all. Amen." Sasuke!
|
Sasuke
Member (Idle past 5185 days) Posts: 137 Joined: 08-21-2009
|
Re: mass has energy
DA, matter is inanimate without force. If something is moving through space it is initially due to the BB which was a force. Don't confuse matter falling via gravity as initial force.
"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with you all. Amen." Sasuke!
|
Sasuke
Member (Idle past 5185 days) Posts: 137 Joined: 08-21-2009
|
Re: mass has energy
quote:
Matter doesn't exist without these forces. It is these forces themselves that create the matter (quarks, electrons, etc) around us.
Correct.
quote:
The BB wasn't a force it was a phenomena of spactime. The BB originated our four fundamental forces that are evident in nature today.
Correct. There was a force behind the BB and that's what Im refering to.
quote:
When did I ever said that 'matter falling via gravity' (whatever that means) is an initial force?!? I think you are confused as what I am saying. Please elaborate.
I am saying that, the force behind momentum is the energy. FYI: We are off topic.. Lets discuss it here. EvC Forum: Where did the matter and energy come from? Edited by Sasuke, : edit Edited by Sasuke, : edit Edited by Sasuke, : EvC Forum: Where did the matter and energy come from? Edited by Sasuke, : Edited by Sasuke, : quotes
"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with you all. Amen." Sasuke!
|
Sasuke
Member (Idle past 5185 days) Posts: 137 Joined: 08-21-2009
|
CS,
CS writes: No, radioactive matter will release energy in the form of radioactive decay without stimulation. Matter is forming or breaking down here. This does not show that matter has a capacity to do work. This shows that energy will form bonds to eventually become matter.
CS writes: No, due to Brownian Motion, independent of stimulation. These are atomic particles. You know protons, neutrons and electrons floating around attempting to form bonds or form matter. This is not matter yet. Particle physics - Wikipedia
cs writes:
Not necessarily.
I disagree.
CS writes: Uhh, no. Just look at the wiki page on energy. Also, a taught spring has a lot of potential energy without any relative momentum.
Both of these examples, in a case where you are still not correct, is refering to potential energy WRT to matter. Potential energy is not energy... ITS POTENTIAL(unactive).. This is like a car that is being manufactured by FORD. Its a potential car but it is not a car YET.
CS writes: Matter always has momentum, it never doesn't have momentum.
Correct. While matter has momentum the force behind its momentum is the energy not the matter its self. -Hey lets take the rest of our discussion to this thread. EvC Forum: Where did the matter and energy come from?. Edited by Sasuke, : err Edited by Sasuke, : edit Edited by Sasuke, : edit Edited by Sasuke, : Edited by Sasuke, : edit -EvC Forum: Where did the matter and energy come from?
"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with you all. Amen." Sasuke!
|
Sasuke
Member (Idle past 5185 days) Posts: 137 Joined: 08-21-2009
|
|
|
Message 114 of 156 (545599)
02-04-2010 1:13 PM
|
Reply to: Message 113 by Rahvin
02-04-2010 1:05 PM
|
|
Re: Sasuke, you have some very basic misconceptions
Rahvin, I perhaps am a little confused. However, so is CS. CS READ^. BTW excellent post. 5. . Thanks for the help. This actually clears my confusion up. One question though.
quote:
Common usage of a term is inaccurate when applied to the scientific usage of the same term. Potential energy is still energy. A rock held above your head has a greater energy content than a rock at your feet.
How does the rock held above my head have greater energy content than the rock at my feet since they are both falling through spacetime equally? - go here to respond EvC Forum: Where did the matter and energy come from? Edited by Sasuke, : question Edited by Sasuke, : Edited by Sasuke, : edit Edited by Sasuke, : edit
"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with you all. Amen." Sasuke!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 113 by Rahvin, posted 02-04-2010 1:05 PM | | Rahvin has not replied |
|
Sasuke
Member (Idle past 5185 days) Posts: 137 Joined: 08-21-2009
|
Re: Sasuke, you have some very basic misconceptions
CS, The rocks are both falling toward earth. The larger mass. therefor same potential energy for both. Move to this thread to continue our discussion: EvC Forum: Where did the matter and energy come from? Edited by Sasuke, : edit
"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with you all. Amen." Sasuke!
|
Sasuke
Member (Idle past 5185 days) Posts: 137 Joined: 08-21-2009
|
Re: Sasuke, you have some very basic misconceptions
EvC Forum: Where did the matter and energy come from?
"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with you all. Amen." Sasuke!
|
Sasuke
Member (Idle past 5185 days) Posts: 137 Joined: 08-21-2009
|
|
|
Message 120 of 156 (545615)
02-04-2010 2:07 PM
|
Reply to: Message 119 by Rahvin
02-04-2010 2:05 PM
|
|
Re: Sasuke, you have some very basic misconceptions
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 119 by Rahvin, posted 02-04-2010 2:05 PM | | Rahvin has not replied |
|
Sasuke
Member (Idle past 5185 days) Posts: 137 Joined: 08-21-2009
|
CS,
CS writes: "Energy" doesn't form bonds, and its not a thing or stuff. Yes it does. An example would be with covalent bonds, where charged particles, namely electrons are being shared betwen two different elements to form molecules. You can even say the same thing for hydrogen bonds which is how h20 molecules are held together via electromagnetism which is a form of energy.
CS writes: And if you stood next to some radioactive matter, it would do all kinds of work to your body. Point taken.
CS writes: No, they are molecules and that's matter. I don't see anything in brownian motion that says it's specifically about random motion of molecules. Although it does direct you to particle physics talking about atomic particles. It does talk about random movement within water molecules but it does not specifically say it's random motion of water molecules either. Can you site a source for this idea you assert? I am knew to this concept sorry.....
CS writes: An explanation would've been nice.
I already gave it and you responded to my reason so I simply disagreed.
CS writes: Swing... and a miss. You're just exposing your misunderstanding of energy and potential energy. Just look it up. Point taken.
CS writes: Energy is not a force Actually energy can be a force. Read the first line of that link you provided.
quote:
In physics, the concept of force is used to describe an influence which causes a free massive body to undergo an acceleration.
Acceleration does attribute to kinetic, gravitational, and even electromagnetic energy. A rock falling is a perfect example of how force is in fact a form of energy. I've realized so much from all this discussion with you, DA, cavediver and Rahvin. What have you learned? Edited by Sasuke, : quote Edited by Sasuke, : edit Edited by Sasuke, : No reason given. Edited by Sasuke, : errors with link Edited by Sasuke, : edit
"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with you all. Amen." Sasuke!
|
™ Version 4.2