Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Tue, 12 Dec 2006 21:17:58 -0500:
Hi Harry,
[snip]
You might ask, isn't the function of gravitational mass to attract?
This answer is no. Gravitational mass reflects a body's indifference
to having its gravitational
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Tue, 12 Dec 2006 21:17:58 -0500:
Hi Harry,
[snip]
You might ask, isn't the function of gravitational mass to attract?
This answer is no. Gravitational mass reflects a body's indifference
to having its gravitational acceleration impeded by another body.
Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Mon, 04 Dec 2006 17:14:46 -0500:
Hi Harry,
[snip]
However, I also make distinction between gravitational
mass and inertial mass.
The sun would still have plenty of inertial mass, and it is
this inertial mass that attracts
Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Sun, 03 Dec 2006 23:24:34 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
New speculation:
The electrons and protons have weight only when they form
molecules such as H2. Neutrons have weight both when they are free
and when they are part of a nucleus.
Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Sun, 03 Dec 2006 23:24:34 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
New speculation:
The electrons and protons have weight only when they form
molecules such as H2. Neutrons have weight both when they are free
and when they are part of a nucleus.
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Mon, 04 Dec 2006 17:14:46 -0500:
Hi Harry,
[snip]
However, I also make distinction between gravitational
mass and inertial mass.
The sun would still have plenty of inertial mass, and it is
this inertial mass that attracts (accelerates) the planets.
You
Harry Veeder wrote:
Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
Ok.
New speculation:
The electrons and protons have weight only when they form
molecules such as H2. Neutrons have weight both when they are free
and when they are part of a nucleus.
I don't understand why you would think that protrons wouldn't
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Sun, 03 Dec 2006 23:24:34 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
New speculation:
The electrons and protons have weight only when they form
molecules such as H2. Neutrons have weight both when they are free
and when they are part of a nucleus.
[snip]
Since the Sun is mostly a
thomas malloy wrote:
Harry Veeder wrote:
Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
Ok.
New speculation:
The electrons and protons have weight only when they form
molecules such as H2. Neutrons have weight both when they are free
and when they are part of a nucleus.
I don't understand why you
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Thu, 30 Nov 2006 02:07:30 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
Here is another speculation:
Maybe only neutrons have gravity.
[snip]
H2 gas has weight, and it has no neutrons (to speak of).
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/
Competition
Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Thu, 30 Nov 2006 02:07:30 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
Here is another speculation:
Maybe only neutrons have gravity.
[snip]
H2 gas has weight, and it has no neutrons (to speak of).
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
Ok.
New
Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Fri, 24 Nov 2006 16:37:45 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
Obviouslybut then again
maybe free electrons and protons have no weight.
[snip]
The Solar corona (no to mention the Sun itself) is largely free electrons and
protons, yet they
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Fri, 24 Nov 2006 16:37:45 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
Obviouslybut then again
maybe free electrons and protons have no weight.
[snip]
The Solar corona (no to mention the Sun itself) is largely free electrons and
protons, yet they are kept attached to the Sun by
, November 25, 2006 4:19 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: weight and charge
Frederick Sparber wrote:
Harry Veeder wrote:
Here is an example of little speed bumps generating
electricity.
http://www.kinergypower.com/index_files/Page452.htm
Harry
The last time I drove over a concave speed bump
at the patent office have a sense of humor too.
OTOH. It sheds new light on the meaning of Beltways, and the Beltway
Bandits.
Fred
- Original Message -
From: Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2006 4:19 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: weight and charge
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Fink [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2006 11:11 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: [Vo]: weight and charge
I didn't follow all of this thread, but an interesting thought occurred to
me that may have been considered and rejected
- Original Message -
From: Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2006 4:19 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: weight and charge
Frederick Sparber wrote:
Harry Veeder wrote:
Here is an example of little speed bumps generating
electricity.
http
- Original Message -
From: Jeff Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2006 11:49 AM
Subject: [Vo]: FW: [Vo]: weight and charge
Rather than use hydraulic shocks on vehicles that convert energy into
waste
heat, why not use electro magnetic shocks
On Saturday 25 November 2006 18:19, Kyle R. Mcallister wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Jeff Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2006 11:49 AM
Subject: [Vo]: FW: [Vo]: weight and charge
Rather than use hydraulic shocks on vehicles
Harry wasn't kidding Michel. He knows this from his experience
moonlighting as a speed-bump at WalMart.
Fred
[Original Message]
From: Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: 11/24/2006 2:00:09 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: weight and charge
I guess Harry was teasing us
PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Friday, November 24, 2006 10:20 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: weight and charge
Harry wasn't kidding Michel. He knows this from his experience
moonlighting as a speed-bump at WalMart.
Fred
[Original Message]
From: Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex
: Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: 11/24/2006 2:54:25 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: weight and charge
LOL
BTW my posts to Vortex are getting through again since I swapped ISP's, I
am quite glad. Maybe the list server is equipped with some whimsical
antispam software blocking
Michel,
This time I am being serious.
If one begins with the postulate that that all weight is
apparent weight then it is easier to understand how
and why weight anomalies might arise.
Gravity is the tendency of a body to accelerate.
Weight is only a _measure_ of this tendency, and it is
a
their entry level position.
OTOH, I hear that missionary positions abound in Amsterdam
if you tend to have a religious bent.
Fred
[Original Message]
From: Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: 11/24/2006 2:54:25 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: weight and charge
LOL
BTW
Harry Veeder wrote:
Here is an example of little speed bumps generating
electricity.
http://www.kinergypower.com/index_files/Page452.htm
Harry
follow-up
the piezoelectric freeway...
http://www.halfbakery.com/idea/piezo_20motorway_20(freeway)
Harry
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Fri, 24 Nov 2006 13:40:25 -0500:
Hi Harry,
[snip]
Is it possible you are confusing weight and mass? (You're certainly confusing me
;)
Michel,
This time I am being serious.
If one begins with the postulate that that all weight is
apparent weight then it is
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Fri, 24 Nov 2006 15:16:15 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
Here is an example of little speed bumps generating
electricity.
http://www.kinergypower.com/index_files/Page452.htm
This device falls in the not even wrong category. Essentially it is an
extremely inefficient
Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Thu, 23 Nov 2006 14:25:19
-0500:
Hi,
[snip]
If charged particles have weight then they would weigh less when
moving in a horizontal plane.
Why? Because the faster you travel over the surface of the Earth, the less
bent.
Fred
[Original Message]
From: Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: 11/24/2006 2:54:25 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: weight and charge
LOL
BTW my posts to Vortex are getting through again since I swapped
ISP's, I
am quite glad. Maybe the list
I make an explicit distinction between inertial mass and
gravitational mass.
Lets call them m' for inertial mass and m~ for gravitational mass.
If a is an acceleration due to an inertial force,
and g is the acceleration due to gravity, then
weight = (m~)(g)
inertial force = (m')(a)
See
Frederick Sparber wrote:
Harry Veeder wrote:
Here is an example of little speed bumps generating
electricity.
http://www.kinergypower.com/index_files/Page452.htm
Harry
The last time I drove over a concave speed bump aka a pothole it
cost me a tire and a new wheel. I guess I
Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Fri, 24 Nov 2006 15:16:15 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
Here is an example of little speed bumps generating
electricity.
http://www.kinergypower.com/index_files/Page452.htm
This device falls in the not even wrong category.
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Thu, 23 Nov 2006 14:25:19
-0500:
Hi,
[snip]
If charged particles have weight then they would weigh less when
moving in a horizontal plane.
Why? Because the faster you travel over the surface of the Earth, the less
you weigh.
Weight is maximum when you are
33 matches
Mail list logo
