Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix

Liste des GroupesRevenir à sp relativity 
Sujet : Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix
De : ross.a.finlayson (at) *nospam* gmail.com (Ross Finlayson)
Groupes : sci.physics.relativity
Date : 17. Sep 2024, 20:41:42
Autres entêtes
Message-ID : <Uj6dnY-qhbLyUHT7nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@giganews.com>
References : 1 2
User-Agent : Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0
On 09/17/2024 04:34 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:
>
Does anybody even bother to think about vis-viva versus vis-motrix
anymore, with regards to conservation, momentum, inertia, and energy,
and potential and impulse energy?
>
Of course not. These are obsolete distinctions,
from a time when energy and momentum conservation was not corectly
understood.
The matter was put to rest by Christiaan Huygens
by showing (for particle collisions)
that momentum conservation and energy conservation
are distinct conservation laws, that are both needed,
>
Jan
>
>
Is it usually considered at all that momentum and inertia change
places with respect to resistance to change of motion and rest
respectively sort of back and forth in the theory since antiquity?
>
Several times?
Au contraire, there is yet definition up, in the air, as it were.
Find any reference to fictitious forces and for a theory
where the potential fields are what's real and the classical
field's just a projection to a perspective in the middle,
and anything at all to do with the plainly empirical or
tribological with regards to our grandly theoretical,
and one may find that the definitions of "inertia" and
"momentum" with regards to resistance to changes in motion
and resistance to changes in rest, as with regards to
weight and as with regards to heft, have rotated each
few hundred years, as with regards to the great schism
whence Newton's vis-motrix, as with regards to the vis-insita
and Leibnitz' vis-viva, as what for example can be read into
from the Wikipedia on conservation of _energy_ and conservation
of _momentum_ up to today, where for example, the "infinitely-many
higher orders of theoretical acceleration are both formally
non-zero and vanishing" because "zero meters/second
equals infinity seconds/meter".
So, for a true centrifugal, and quite all about the derivative
and anti-derivative as with regards to momentum, inertia,
and kinetic energy, in a theory what's of course sum-of-histories
sum-of-potentials with least action and gradient, or sum-of-potentials,
it is so that the various under-defined concepts of the plain laws
of after Newton, are as yet un-defined, and there are a variety
of considerations as with regards to the multiplicities, or
these singularities, and the reciprocities, of these projections.
So, some of these considerations as since "Mediaeval Times",
help reflect that Einstein's not alone in his, 'attack on Newton'.

Date Sujet#  Auteur
17 Sep 24 * vis-viva and vis-motrix33Ross Finlayson
17 Sep 24 +* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix27J. J. Lodder
17 Sep 24 i`* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix26Ross Finlayson
22 Sep 24 i `* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix25Ross Finlayson
22 Sep 24 i  `* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix24Ross Finlayson
25 Sep 24 i   +* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix20Ross Finlayson
26 Sep 24 i   i`* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix19Ross Finlayson
26 Sep 24 i   i `* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix18Ross Finlayson
26 Sep 24 i   i  +- Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix1Ross Finlayson
28 Sep 24 i   i  +* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix3Ross Finlayson
28 Sep 24 i   i  i`* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix2Ross Finlayson
28 Sep 24 i   i  i `- Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix1Ross Finlayson
28 Sep 24 i   i  `* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix13Thomas Heger
28 Sep 24 i   i   `* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix12Ross Finlayson
30 Sep03:13 i   i    +- Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix1Ross Finlayson
30 Sep07:20 i   i    `* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix10Thomas Heger
30 Sep20:55 i   i     `* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix9Ross Finlayson
1 Oct08:48 i   i      `* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix8Thomas Heger
1 Oct15:27 i   i       +* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix4Richard Hachel
1 Oct18:53 i   i       i+- Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix1Ross Finlayson
2 Oct20:58 i   i       i`* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix2Thomas Heger
3 Oct04:22 i   i       i `- Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix1Ross Finlayson
2 Oct02:49 i   i       `* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix3Ross Finlayson
3 Oct22:51 i   i        `* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix2Ross Finlayson
4 Oct04:46 i   i         `- Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix1Ross Finlayson
25 Sep 24 i   `* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix3J. J. Lodder
26 Sep 24 i    `* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix2Ross Finlayson
26 Sep 24 i     `- Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix1J. J. Lodder
26 Sep 24 `* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix5bertietaylor
26 Sep 24  `* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix4Ross Finlayson
26 Sep 24   +- Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix1bertietaylor
26 Sep 24   `* Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix2bertietaylor
27 Sep 24    `- Re: vis-viva and vis-motrix1Ross Finlayson

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal