[FelikTen]

Would it?

I don't even know what that means.

It has occurred to me that the relationship between an electric field and a magnetic one is very similar to the way I understand particles and their relationship to the space around them. To illustrate this I would pose a time field in opposition to a space field. The two cannot combine as the momentum of the time field is contrary to that of the space field. Due to the linear characteristics of the time field, time like particles are dominated and subjugated to the space field.

What I mean by the second question is a follow on of this concept, so that gravity is not a force between particles, but a part of the mechanism that separates particles from space itself.

[parurorges]

FWIW, this is how Wikipedia defines mass:

"In physics, mass (from Greek μᾶζα "barley cake, lump (of dough)"), more specifically inertial mass, can be defined as a quantitative measure of an object's resistance to acceleration. In addition to this, gravitational mass can be described as a measure of magnitude of the gravitational force which is
1.exerted by an object (active gravitational mass), or
2.experienced by an object (passive gravitational force)

when interacting with a second object. The SI unit of mass is the kilogram (kg)."

So mass (or at least inertial mass) is a measure of inertia.

The definition of a terminology is not always concise.

[pobrierce]

Well if you are going to redefine mass and inertia they can mean whatever you would like them to mean, but it does make it a bit difficult to discuss with other people.

I accept fully that I am splitting hairs, but I would say it is not an impractical endeavor in this instance.

[KneefeZes]

The definition of a terminology is not always concise.

But in this case mass and inertia do have concise definitions that are universally accepted by scientists.

o now.


Have to g

[kuklame]

I accept fully that I am splitting hairs, but I would say it is not an impractical endeavor in this instance.

I don't think that redefining basic terms is splitting hairs.

[lYVgWWcP]

But in this case mass and inertia do have concise definitions that are universally accepted by scientists.

o now.


Have to g

Only concise enough to illustrate the relationship between inertia and mass. There would be no argument over the Higgs particle if the functions of either had been properly identified. Enjoy your day Rev. Hope the sun is shining for you.

[Barryrich]

I don't think that redefining basic terms is splitting hairs.

I am not trying to redefine a term. I am trying to identify a function. The English language is more developed than the physics for my liking, in this instance.

[Haftdrarp]

seems a post or two has been pulled... or maybe I never posted

On Earth there is inertia... apparently.... but really that is friction/gravity etc

Stationary things stay stationary
but moving things don't stay moving

In space nothing is stationary (you may say "at rest", whatever that means )
everything is moving and stays moving

so the definition of inertia is anthropogenic, useful on Earth... ???? or archaic ???

From my point of view
inertia is a useless concept

INERTIAL is the term I prefer... such as the motion of the Earth around the Sun, that is inertial motion... Earth is doing what it should given the forces acting upon it,,, and the inertial frame of reference is the Solar System
realising also that the Solar System is also undergoing some sort of other inertial motion in another inertial frame

So for me, inertia is out and inertial is solely confined to the cosmos.. no earthlings allowed LOL

I might add that on Earth there is mass ----> weight

In space mass does not enter into cosmic geometry.

So What is mass ??

[Ehlgamxf]

Good morning Zarkov.

You seem to have a misunderstanding of the concept of inertia.

[BodeOmissemia]

Good morning Rev
You seem to have a misunderstanding of the concept of inertia. Great, always willing to change my tune given relevant information

Please expand, please

[opdirorg]

Good morning Rev


Great, always willing to change my tune given relevant information

Who are you and what have you done with our Zarkov? You know the one who never changes tune based on facts

[Larisochka]

You know the one who never changes tune based on facts LOL

I don't need to change what is correct

I was a baby once ( ??maybe) so there was a time when I did not know everything

[dodsCooggipsedebt]

If an electric field is found 90% to a magnetic field, wouldn't this imply that particles travel in opposition to the momentum of space? Is gravitation the rejection of particles from the flow of space? what a load of cobblers. stop making shit up. momentum of space??? the flow of space???

sheesh.

[adolfadsermens]

what a load of cobblers. stop making shit up. momentum of space??? the flow of space???

sheesh.

You asked for an explanation. The terms you object to are included 'for want of a better term'. Your not being able to follow what I am describing doesn't mean I have made anything up. When I can point to something more substantial for you, I'll keep it to myself.

Are you the local thought inspector, incidentally? I have plenty of complaints about the way people think. Have been waiting for a formal opportunity to divest myself of such concerns.

[smifatv]

The existence of mass creates inertia for that mass-the 2 are concurrent. If one, then the other also. even with crude newtonian dynamics, it's pretty easy to see the correlation. AFAIK the newtonian laws of motion apply to all things of physical matter pertaining to this state of existence. Whether they apply to spirit matter I cannot say for certain, but the evidence indicates "not" so far. Spirit matter being more pure than temporal matter [& thus rarely observed], and being obedient to an higher plane of laws than temporal matter. vis the Mosaic laws and the Christian laws-different planes for same basic purpose, the latter being an higher set of laws, and the former to have an end.

[PapsEdisa]

I mostly post on these subjects to expand what I have studied into cohesive language. I have found including others in this process to be a positive in this. If you do not wish to take part in this, nobody is obliged.

[wMceqj7F]

subject, PLEEEAASSE !!!!

[Kokomoxcvcv]

subject, PLEEEAASSE !!!!

I did not intend my speculation to lead where it did. sorry Zarkov.

[Helloheshess]

Inertia is a hypothetical property to which we attribute an object's conserving of momentum.

[ZIDouglas]

Inertia is a hypothetical property to which we attribute an object's conserving of momentum.

can't argue