Bias?
Democracy?
We are talking about physics right?
Velocity = distance / time = change in position / time = dx/t
Acceleration = change in velocity / time = dv/t = dx/t/t
Velocity is how far an object moves in a given amount of time. The inverse would be how much time it takes to go a given distance.
Inverse velocity (v^-1) = time / distance = dt/x
To arrive at Acceleration you take the derivative of the Velocity formula. Taking the derivative of the formula for Inverse velocity does not get you the formula for Inverse Acceleration.
Of course the definition of acceleration is lopsided. It is the application of change over time to a formula which already contains that term.
You can't just look at the terms and say this one should be treated the same as the other one, you have to remember what the terms stand for and how they could logically be used.
Sometimes you have to go back to the basics.
Grimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It is interesting to find that the definition of
acceleration is lopsided. This leads to acceleration
being given dimensions which are biased,
i.e. [L]/[T]^2
You can see this for yourselves by going though the
process of defining acceleration's reciprocal starting
with the inverse of velocity, namely, change in time
per unit length.
The only unbiased way to treat acceleration and its
inverse democratically is to use
[L].[L]/[T].[T] = [L]/[T].[L]/[T] or velocity squared.
What a mess. It's not just Mass that's been ridden over
roughshod. Simone Weil was right.
Grimer
Merlyn
Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com
- RE: Dimensions of mass Adam Cox
- RE: Dimensions of mass Grimer
- RE: Dimensions of mass Grimer
