Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #700793 > unrolled thread

CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!!

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS  ??!! poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-01 20:41 -0700
    Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS  ??!! mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-09-01 20:50 -0700
      Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS  ??!! poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-01 21:54 -0700
        Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS  ??!! poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-02 00:29 -0700
    CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS  ??!! Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 04:36 -0700
    Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 13:19 +0000
      Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!! Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 06:38 -0700
      Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!! benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 12:22 -0400
      Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!! poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-02 11:42 -0700
      Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!! poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-03 06:02 -0700
        Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-03 15:14 +0000
          Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!! poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-03 10:15 -0700
            Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-03 17:22 +0000
              Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!! poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-04 05:30 -0700
                Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-04 16:00 +0000
                  Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!! Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-09-04 11:35 -0500
                    Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!! poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-04 10:17 -0700
                  Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!! poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-04 10:23 -0700
                    Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-04 18:02 +0000
                      Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!! poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-04 11:56 -0700
                        Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!! Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-04 19:30 +0000
    Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!! Henrietta Foreskineater <invalid@example.com> - 2018-09-02 07:18 -0700
      Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!! benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 12:19 -0400
    Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS  ??!! "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 13:45 -0700
      Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS  ??!! poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-03 01:49 -0700
    Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS  ??!! "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 13:46 -0700
      Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS  ??!! "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-09-02 14:23 -0700
        Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS  ??!! mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-09-02 14:29 -0700

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#700793 — CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!!

can we have energy without mass ??!!
-----
E=m c^2
right ??

so 
can we have m c^2
without m ??!!

 is it not in addition!! 
 a mathematical  prove prove that 
there is no energy without Mass ??!!!
2
could mass be created fro something else ??
so 
it is another  prove that
mass was here ever since
in other words 
no mass was *created* 
it was ever since 
2
mass can be  either in a **static situation
or 
in movement   !

==
2
but now remains the question :
WHAT     created/CREATES    all forces ?

OR 
CAN THERE  BE MOVEMENT WITHOUT MASS ??!!

mass with- out   movement exist !!(only inner cyclic  movement  exist in that case ) !!
====
TIA
Y.Porat
================

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#700794

On Saturday, September 1, 2018 at 8:41:04 PM UTC-7, pora...@gmail.com wrote:
> can we have energy without mass ??!!
> -----
> E=m c^2
> right ??
> 
> so 
> can we have m c^2
> without m ??!!
> 
>  is it not in addition!! 
>  a mathematical  prove prove that 
> there is no energy without Mass ??!!!
> 2
> could mass be created fro something else ??
> so 
> it is another  prove that
> mass was here ever since
> in other words 
> no mass was *created* 
> it was ever since 
> 2
> mass can be  either in a **static situation
> or 
> in movement   !
> 
> ==
> 2
> but now remains the question :
> WHAT     created/CREATES    all forces ?
> 
> OR 
> CAN THERE  BE MOVEMENT WITHOUT MASS ??!!
> 
> mass with- out   movement exist !!(only inner cyclic  movement  exist in that case ) !!
> ====
> TIA
> Y.Porat
> ================

Energy has to have a density.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700807

On Sunday, September 2, 2018 at 6:50:34 AM UTC+3, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, September 1, 2018 at 8:41:04 PM UTC-7, pora...@gmail.com wrote:
> > can we have energy without mass ??!!
> > -----
> > E=m c^2
> > right ??
> > 
> > so 
> > can we have m c^2
> > without m ??!!
> > 
> >  is it not in addition!! 
> >  a mathematical  prove prove that 
> > there is no energy without Mass ??!!!
> > 2
> > could mass be created fro something else ??
> > so 
> > it is another  prove that
> > mass was here ever since
> > in other words 
> > no mass was *created* 
> > it was ever since 
> > 2
> > mass can be  either in a **static situation
> > or 
> > in movement   !
> > 
> > ==
> > 2
> > but now remains the question :
> > WHAT     created/CREATES    all forces ?
> > 
> > OR 
> > CAN THERE  BE MOVEMENT WITHOUT MASS ??!!
> > 
> > mass with- out   movement exist !!(only inner cyclic  movement  exist in that case ) !!
> > ====
> > TIA
> > Y.Porat
> > ================
> 
 Energy has to have a density.
================================


ok you mean  have some density
==**in order to be useful/noticeable  !!
===========================================

but now i have a sacred mission :
ie
=================================================
TO  PROVE THAT **ALL**FORES - INCLUDING GRAVITY
ARE DONE MY MASS **!!
==================================================
----
not an easy mission 
so
can one or some  of you 
loin me   to prove that
====
TIA
Y.Porat
==================


MASS88 IS THE CREATOR
OF ALL (ALL !)
FORCES !!


can anyone or some  of you  
-join me with  that sacred mission?!!
====
TIA
Y.Porat
=======================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700826

On Sunday, September 2, 2018 at 7:54:53 AM UTC+3, pora...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, September 2, 2018 at 6:50:34 AM UTC+3, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Saturday, September 1, 2018 at 8:41:04 PM UTC-7, pora...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > can we have energy without mass ??!!
> > > -----
> > > E=m c^2
> > > right ??
> > > 
> > > so 
> > > can we have m c^2
> > > without m ??!!
> > > 
> > >  is it not in addition!! 
> > >  a mathematical  prove prove that 
> > > there is no energy without Mass ??!!!
> > > 2
> > > could mass be created fro something else ??
> > > so 
> > > it is another  prove that
> > > mass was here ever since
> > > in other words 
> > > no mass was *created* 
> > > it was ever since 
> > > 2
> > > mass can be  either in a **static situation
> > > or 
> > > in movement   !
> > > 
> > > ==
> > > 2
> > > but now remains the question :
> > > WHAT     created/CREATES    all forces ?
> > > 
> > > OR 
> > > CAN THERE  BE MOVEMENT WITHOUT MASS ??!!
> > > 
> > > mass with- out   movement exist !!(only inner cyclic  movement  exist in that case ) !!
> > > ====
> > > TIA
> > > Y.Porat
> > > ================
> > 
>  Energy has to have a density.
> ================================
> 
> 
> ok you mean  have some density
> ==**in order to be useful/noticeable  !!
> ===========================================
> 
> but now i have a sacred mission :
> ie
> =================================================
> TO  PROVE THAT **ALL**FORES - INCLUDING GRAVITY
> ARE DONE MY MASS **!!
> ==================================================
> ----
> not an easy mission 
> so
> can one or some  of you 
> loin me   to prove that
> ====
> TIA
> Y.Porat
> ==================
> 
> 
> MASS88 IS THE CREATOR
> OF ALL (ALL !)
> FORCES !!
> 
> 
> can anyone or some  of you  
> -join me with  that sacred mission?!!
> ====
> TIA
> Y.Porat
> 
=======================
and i have to add some clarifications to it :

indeed energy is mass  in movement
yet it is not
all the story'' :

the question is 
WHAT  KIND (OR KINDS !)OF MOVEMENT DO WE HAVE 
IN NATURE ??!!
i claim that
that there are at least 
2 kind of movement !

1
linear movement 
2
curved line movement !!

a big mass can  move 
both  kinds of the above movements 
so 
the question is 
what makes the curve line   movement ?
--
the common  parrot will say 
''it is 'curved space'' movement 
ioe
in space we have some *witches on brooms* that do it 

you see it is empty space !
but in one case -letting straight line movement
i another case letting  only 
'curved  line 'movement
why ??
because / ie
because ''''.....-
i/you uderstand it as such  '' !
-----
now my new claim is
it is not curved and not schmeved space !!

it is something else 
IT IS SOME UNKNOWN YET
** PROPERTY  OF  
**MASS **
ie
in some situations-- srtraight line movement

in other situations ---curved line  movement !!
so
now it is your turn to ask :

in  which cases straight line ?

and other cases--
curved li??
that is ***the*** question !
======
TIA
Y.P
======================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700838

E=mcc is WRONG.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700840 — Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!!

<poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> can we have energy without mass ??!!
> -----
> E=m c^2
> right ??

Be careful. That is not saying that energy has mass or that mass is energy.


It is a formula expressing how much energy can be made available from rest
mass. 

So many people get this wrong. 

> 
> so 
> can we have m c^2
> without m ??!!
> 
>  is it not in addition!! 
>  a mathematical  prove prove that 
> there is no energy without Mass ??!!!
> 2
> could mass be created fro something else ??
> so 
> it is another  prove that
> mass was here ever since
> in other words 
> no mass was *created* 
> it was ever since 
> 2
> mass can be  either in a **static situation
> or 
> in movement   !
> 
> ==
> 2
> but now remains the question :
> WHAT     created/CREATES    all forces ?
> 
> OR 
> CAN THERE  BE MOVEMENT WITHOUT MASS ??!!
> 
> mass with- out   movement exist !!(only inner cyclic  movement  exist in that case ) !!
> ====
> TIA
> Y.Porat
> ================
> 



-- 
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700842 — Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!!

Whichever way you look at it e=mcc is not only wrong but also ridiculous.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700858 — Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!!

On 9/2/2018 9:19 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
>> can we have energy without mass ??!!
>> -----
>> E=m c^2
>> right ??
> 
> Be careful. That is not saying that energy has mass or that mass is energy.
> 
> 
> It is a formula expressing how much energy can be made available from rest
> mass.
> 
> So many people get this wrong.

Wash my mouth out with soap, but I'm not going to lie even to pull Odd's 
chain. Odd is absolutely correct on this one (although I'm sure he has 
no idea why that is so).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700870 — Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!!

On Sunday, September 2, 2018 at 4:19:26 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> > can we have energy without mass ??!!
> > -----
> > E=m c^2
> > right ??
> 
> Be careful. That is not saying that energy has mass or that mass is energy.
> 
> 
> It is a formula expressing how much energy can be made available from rest
> mass. 
> 
> So many people get this wrong. 
> 
> > 
> > so 
> > can we have m c^2
> > without m ??!!
> > 
> >  is it not in addition!! 
> >  a mathematical  prove prove that 
> > there is no energy without Mass ??!!!
> > 2
> > could mass be created fro something else ??
> > so 
> > it is another  prove that
> > mass was here ever since
> > in other words 
> > no mass was *created* 
> > it was ever since 
> > 2
> > mass can be  either in a **static situation
> > or 
> > in movement   !
> > 
> > ==
> > 2
> > but now remains the question :
> > WHAT     created/CREATES    all forces ?
> > 
> > OR 
> > CAN THERE  BE MOVEMENT WITHOUT MASS ??!!
> > 
> > mass with- out   movement exist !!(only inner cyclic  movement  exist in that case ) !!
> > ====
> > TIA
> > Y.Porat
> > ================
bodkin 
all my model that you see only a bit of it 
is based on 
E=mc^2
my luck was that i found some basic key 
that controls hose binding energies 
all along the periodic table
including the laws that governs mass losses of 
inner  connection  of binding energies 
and i will not go on with  it .
yet 
sub understanding 
binding energies are actually sub  particles.
anfis Bodkin tells me to be careful and not go on with it 
 i will consider it...
yet
mass has inner energies 
2
mass is the creator of all forces
including gravity !!!

TIA
Y.P
===================================
..
 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
>  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700959 — Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!!

On Sunday, September 2, 2018 at 4:19:26 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> > can we have energy without mass ??!!
> > -----
> > E=m c^2
> > right ??
> 
> Be careful. That is not saying that energy has mass or that mass is energy.

================================
you ask me to be careful with mass in energy ?
("-)

may be we have to get new eyes !!

a blind  one can see there 
energy that is done by 
mass s well 
 movement 
only an over supper  smarty don t see it

that is the problem with you smarties 
you make big efforts  to  be *over smart*
unlike me that i make my best 
to  be as simple as can be  

i think basic  nature as well does it 
basic  nature does not know
your over smarty   mathematics 
and  supper sophistications  
===============
ATB
Y.P
========================  

> 
> 
> It is a formula expressing how much energy can be made available from rest
> mass. 
> 
> So many people get this wrong. 
> 
> > 
> > so 
> > can we have m c^2
> > without m ??!!
> > 
> >  is it not in addition!! 
> >  a mathematical  prove prove that 
> > there is no energy without Mass ??!!!
> > 2
> > could mass be created fro something else ??
> > so 
> > it is another  prove that
> > mass was here ever since
> > in other words 
> > no mass was *created* 
> > it was ever since 
> > 2
> > mass can be  either in a **static situation
> > or 
> > in movement   !
> > 
> > ==
> > 2
> > but now remains the question :
> > WHAT     created/CREATES    all forces ?
> > 
> > OR 
> > CAN THERE  BE MOVEMENT WITHOUT MASS ??!!
> > 
> > mass with- out   movement exist !!(only inner cyclic  movement  exist in that case ) !!
> > ====
> > TIA
> > Y.Porat
> > ================
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700962 — Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!!

<poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, September 2, 2018 at 4:19:26 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> can we have energy without mass ??!!
>>> -----
>>> E=m c^2
>>> right ??
>> 
>> Be careful. That is not saying that energy has mass or that mass is energy.
> 
> ===============================you ask me to be careful with mass in energy ?
> ("-)
> 
> may be we have to get new eyes !!
> 
> a blind  one can see there 
> energy that is done by 
> mass s well 
>  movement 
> only an over supper  smarty don t see it

Which has nothing to do with E=mc^2. 


> 
> that is the problem with you smarties 
> you make big efforts  to  be *over smart*
> unlike me that i make my best 
> to  be as simple as can be  

Simple is no cure for being incorrectly informed. 

> 
> i think basic  nature as well does it 
> basic  nature does not know
> your over smarty   mathematics 
> and  supper sophistications  

Basic nature does what it does, and it’s our job to understand what it
does. Nature doesn’t give a damn what our common sense says, and nature has
shown over and over again that our common sense is inadequate for
understanding it. 

Besides, the mathematics is not that difficult for those young enough and
interested enough to learn them. Nor are the ideas of quantum mechanics and
fields all that difficult to grasp. 

The world is a lot more interesting than your simple material view. 

> ==============ATB
> Y.P
> ========================  
> 
>> 
>> 
>> It is a formula expressing how much energy can be made available from rest
>> mass. 
>> 
>> So many people get this wrong. 
>> 
>>> 
>>> so 
>>> can we have m c^2
>>> without m ??!!
>>> 
>>> is it not in addition!! 
>>> a mathematical  prove prove that 
>>> there is no energy without Mass ??!!!
>>> 2
>>> could mass be created fro something else ??
>>> so 
>>> it is another  prove that
>>> mass was here ever since
>>> in other words 
>>> no mass was *created* 
>>> it was ever since 
>>> 2
>>> mass can be  either in a **static situation
>>> or 
>>> in movement   !
>>> 
>>> => > 2
>>> but now remains the question :
>>> WHAT     created/CREATES    all forces ?
>>> 
>>> OR 
>>> CAN THERE  BE MOVEMENT WITHOUT MASS ??!!
>>> 
>>> mass with- out   movement exist !!(only inner cyclic  movement  exist in that case ) !!
>>> ===> > TIA
>>> Y.Porat
>>> ===============> > 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Odd Bodkin  Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> 
> 



-- 
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700984 — Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!!

On Monday, September 3, 2018 at 6:15:03 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, September 2, 2018 at 4:19:26 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> can we have energy without mass ??!!
> >>> -----
> >>> E=m c^2
> >>> right ??
> >> 
> >> Be careful. That is not saying that energy has mass or that mass is energy.
> > 
> > ===============================you ask me to be careful with mass in energy ?
> > ("-)
> > 
> > may be we have to get new eyes !!
> > 
> > a blind  one can see there 
> > energy that is done by 
> > mass s well 
> >  movement 
> > only an over supper  smarty don t see it
> 
> Which has nothing to do with E=mc^2. 
> 
> 
> > 
> > that is the problem with you smarties 
> > you make big efforts  to  be *over smart*
> > unlike me that i make my best 
> > to  be as simple as can be  
> 
> Simple is no cure for being incorrectly informed. 
> 
> > 
> > i think basic  nature as well does it 
> > basic  nature does not know
> > your over smarty   mathematics 
> > and  supper sophistications  
> 
> Basic nature does what it does, and it’s our job to understand what it
> does. Nature doesn’t give a damn what our common sense says, and nature has
> shown over and over again that our common sense is inadequate for
> understanding it. 
> 
> Besides, the mathematics is not that difficult for those young enough and
> interested enough to learn them. Nor are the ideas of quantum mechanics and
> fields all that difficult to grasp.


========================================
nasty   shameless  crook 
do you think i am one of your miserable students ?? 
=
=E = M C^2
GOT IT SHAMELESS   CROOK 
 
DO YOU   SEE THAT   M   THERE ?!!!!!!
do you think that with your mumble jummle 
==
i will say it in  words 

ENERGY ENERGY !!- IS EQUAL    TO  MASS !! TIMES C^2

M A S S !!  M A  SS   M   A    S S       
do you think you deAl here with little childrenS
HERE    
 =====
TIA
Y.P
======================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700987 — Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!!

<poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, September 3, 2018 at 6:15:03 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sunday, September 2, 2018 at 4:19:26 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> can we have energy without mass ??!!
>>>>> -----
>>>>> E=m c^2
>>>>> right ??
>>>> 
>>>> Be careful. That is not saying that energy has mass or that mass is energy.
>>> 
>>> ===============================you ask me to be careful with mass in energy ?
>>> ("-)
>>> 
>>> may be we have to get new eyes !!
>>> 
>>> a blind  one can see there 
>>> energy that is done by 
>>> mass s well 
>>> movement 
>>> only an over supper  smarty don t see it
>> 
>> Which has nothing to do with E=mc^2. 
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> that is the problem with you smarties 
>>> you make big efforts  to  be *over smart*
>>> unlike me that i make my best 
>>> to  be as simple as can be  
>> 
>> Simple is no cure for being incorrectly informed. 
>> 
>>> 
>>> i think basic  nature as well does it 
>>> basic  nature does not know
>>> your over smarty   mathematics 
>>> and  supper sophistications  
>> 
>> Basic nature does what it does, and its our job to understand what it
>> does. Nature doesnt give a damn what our common sense says, and nature has
>> shown over and over again that our common sense is inadequate for
>> understanding it. 
>> 
>> Besides, the mathematics is not that difficult for those young enough and
>> interested enough to learn them. Nor are the ideas of quantum mechanics and
>> fields all that difficult to grasp.
> 
> 
> =======================================nasty   shameless  crook 
> do you think i am one of your miserable students ?? 
> =E = M C^2
> GOT IT SHAMELESS   CROOK 
>  
> DO YOU   SEE THAT   M   THERE ?!!!!!!
> do you think that with your mumble jummle 
> =i will say it in  words 
> 
> ENERGY ENERGY !!- IS EQUAL    TO  MASS !! TIMES C^2

It is the energy available from the conversion of rest  mass. It is the
numerical equality between two different kinds of physical quantities.
Energy is not mass and mass is not energy, but you can convert from one to
the other and this relation tells you how much. 

You turning purple in the face and yelling won’t change this meaning. 

It is ANALOGOUS to PV=nRT, where neither P nor V is a temperature, but this
equation tells you how to relate pressure, volume and temperature for an
ideal gas. 

> 
> M A S S !!  M A  SS   M   A    S S       
> do you think you deAl here with little childrenS
> HERE    
>  ====TIA
> Y.P
> =====================



-- 
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#701071 — Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!!

On Monday, September 3, 2018 at 8:22:51 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, September 3, 2018 at 6:15:03 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, September 2, 2018 at 4:19:26 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >>>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> can we have energy without mass ??!!
> >>>>> -----
> >>>>> E=m c^2
> >>>>> right ??
> >>>> 
> >>>> Be careful. That is not saying that energy has mass or that mass is energy.
> >>> 
> >>> ===============================you ask me to be careful with mass in energy ?
> >>> ("-)
> >>> 
> >>> may be we have to get new eyes !!
> >>> 
> >>> a blind  one can see there 
> >>> energy that is done by 
> >>> mass s well 
> >>> movement 
> >>> only an over supper  smarty don t see it
> >> 
> >> Which has nothing to do with E=mc^2. 
> >> 
> >> 
> >>> 
> >>> that is the problem with you smarties 
> >>> you make big efforts  to  be *over smart*
> >>> unlike me that i make my best 
> >>> to  be as simple as can be  
> >> 
> >> Simple is no cure for being incorrectly informed. 
> >> 
> >>> 
> >>> i think basic  nature as well does it 
> >>> basic  nature does not know
> >>> your over smarty   mathematics 
> >>> and  supper sophistications  
> >> 
> >> Basic nature does what it does, and it s our job to understand what it
> >> does. Nature doesn t give a damn what our common sense says, and nature has
> >> shown over and over again that our common sense is inadequate for
> >> understanding it. 
> >> 
> >> Besides, the mathematics is not that difficult for those young enough and
> >> interested enough to learn them. Nor are the ideas of quantum mechanics and
> >> fields all that difficult to grasp.
> > 
> > 
> > =======================================nasty   shameless  crook 
> > do you think i am one of your miserable students ?? 
> > =E = M C^2
> > GOT IT SHAMELESS   CROOK 
> >  
> > DO YOU   SEE THAT   M   THERE ?!!!!!!
> > do you think that with your mumble jummle 
> > =i will say it in  words 
> > 
> > ENERGY ENERGY !!- IS EQUAL    TO  MASS !! TIMES C^2
> 
> It is the energy available from the conversion of rest  mass. It is the
> numerical equality between two different kinds of physical quantities.

========================================
only numerical !???
it is numeric   ** times most basic  Dimensions **
=
you know Bodkin
half of the truth  is a lie !!
don t you know that ?after so many years 
 i wonder what happened to you 
may be it is you who are getting  older ??
LIKE SAY 
'the  binding  ***energy** ..of a proton and neutron
is say  0.00123.  A M U ... 
A M U is in mass 
Atomic  mass units A M U 
    Bodkin
you find the wrong man to argue with 
TIA
Y.P
=====================
=== ..


 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#701085 — Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!!

<poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, September 3, 2018 at 8:22:51 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Monday, September 3, 2018 at 6:15:03 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, September 2, 2018 at 4:19:26 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> can we have energy without mass ??!!
>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>> E=m c^2
>>>>>>> right ??
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Be careful. That is not saying that energy has mass or that mass is energy.
>>>>> 
>>>>> ===============================you ask me to be careful with mass in energy ?
>>>>> ("-)
>>>>> 
>>>>> may be we have to get new eyes !!
>>>>> 
>>>>> a blind  one can see there 
>>>>> energy that is done by 
>>>>> mass s well 
>>>>> movement 
>>>>> only an over supper  smarty don t see it
>>>> 
>>>> Which has nothing to do with E=mc^2. 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> that is the problem with you smarties 
>>>>> you make big efforts  to  be *over smart*
>>>>> unlike me that i make my best 
>>>>> to  be as simple as can be  
>>>> 
>>>> Simple is no cure for being incorrectly informed. 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> i think basic  nature as well does it 
>>>>> basic  nature does not know
>>>>> your over smarty   mathematics 
>>>>> and  supper sophistications  
>>>> 
>>>> Basic nature does what it does, and it s our job to understand what it
>>>> does. Nature doesn t give a damn what our common sense says, and nature has
>>>> shown over and over again that our common sense is inadequate for
>>>> understanding it. 
>>>> 
>>>> Besides, the mathematics is not that difficult for those young enough and
>>>> interested enough to learn them. Nor are the ideas of quantum mechanics and
>>>> fields all that difficult to grasp.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> =======================================nasty   shameless  crook 
>>> do you think i am one of your miserable students ?? 
>>> =E = M C^2
>>> GOT IT SHAMELESS   CROOK 
>>> 
>>> DO YOU   SEE THAT   M   THERE ?!!!!!!
>>> do you think that with your mumble jummle 
>>> =i will say it in  words 
>>> 
>>> ENERGY ENERGY !!- IS EQUAL    TO  MASS !! TIMES C^2
>> 
>> It is the energy available from the conversion of rest  mass. It is the
>> numerical equality between two different kinds of physical quantities.
> 
> ========================================
> only numerical !???
> it is numeric   ** times most basic  Dimensions **

Yes only numerical. 

Notice that PV/nR has the same basic dimensions as temperature. But none of
those quantities is a temperature. 

What I just demonstrated with the ideal gas law is also exactly true for
E=mc^2. The dimensions of left and right side are the same, but they are
different physical quantities. 

> =
> you know Bodkin
> half of the truth  is a lie !!
> don t you know that ?after so many years 
>  i wonder what happened to you 
> may be it is you who are getting  older ??
> LIKE SAY 
> 'the  binding  ***energy** ..of a proton and neutron
> is say  0.00123.  A M U ... 
> A M U is in mass 
> Atomic  mass units A M U 
>     Bodkin
> you find the wrong man to argue with 
> TIA
> Y.P
> =====================
> === ..
> 
> 
>  
> 



-- 
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#701088 — Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!!

On 9/4/2018 11:00 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Monday, September 3, 2018 at 8:22:51 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Monday, September 3, 2018 at 6:15:03 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sunday, September 2, 2018 at 4:19:26 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> can we have energy without mass ??!!
>>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>>> E=m c^2
>>>>>>>> right ??
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Be careful. That is not saying that energy has mass or that mass is energy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ===============================you ask me to be careful with mass in energy ?
>>>>>> ("-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> may be we have to get new eyes !!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> a blind  one can see there 
>>>>>> energy that is done by 
>>>>>> mass s well 
>>>>>> movement 
>>>>>> only an over supper  smarty don t see it
>>>>>
>>>>> Which has nothing to do with E=mc^2. 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> that is the problem with you smarties 
>>>>>> you make big efforts  to  be *over smart*
>>>>>> unlike me that i make my best 
>>>>>> to  be as simple as can be  
>>>>>
>>>>> Simple is no cure for being incorrectly informed. 
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i think basic  nature as well does it 
>>>>>> basic  nature does not know
>>>>>> your over smarty   mathematics 
>>>>>> and  supper sophistications  
>>>>>
>>>>> Basic nature does what it does, and it s our job to understand what it
>>>>> does. Nature doesn t give a damn what our common sense says, and nature has
>>>>> shown over and over again that our common sense is inadequate for
>>>>> understanding it. 
>>>>>
>>>>> Besides, the mathematics is not that difficult for those young enough and
>>>>> interested enough to learn them. Nor are the ideas of quantum mechanics and
>>>>> fields all that difficult to grasp.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> =======================================nasty   shameless  crook 
>>>> do you think i am one of your miserable students ?? 
>>>> =E = M C^2
>>>> GOT IT SHAMELESS   CROOK 
>>>>
>>>> DO YOU   SEE THAT   M   THERE ?!!!!!!
>>>> do you think that with your mumble jummle 
>>>> =i will say it in  words 
>>>>
>>>> ENERGY ENERGY !!- IS EQUAL    TO  MASS !! TIMES C^2
>>>
>>> It is the energy available from the conversion of rest  mass. It is the
>>> numerical equality between two different kinds of physical quantities.
>>
>> ========================================
>> only numerical !???
>> it is numeric   ** times most basic  Dimensions **
> 
> Yes only numerical. 
> 
> Notice that PV/nR has the same basic dimensions as temperature. But none of
> those quantities is a temperature. 

E = M C^2

E = energy (measured in joules, J)
m = mass (measured in kilograms, kg)
c = the speed of light (measured in meters per second, ms -1 ),


Joules = mass*meter^2/sec^2              (SI units)

which is what a Joule is defined as.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joule

> 
> What I just demonstrated with the ideal gas law is also exactly true for
> E=mc^2. The dimensions of left and right side are the same, but they are
> different physical quantities. 
> 
>> =
>> you know Bodkin
>> half of the truth  is a lie !!
>> don t you know that ?after so many years 
>>  i wonder what happened to you 
>> may be it is you who are getting  older ??
>> LIKE SAY 
>> 'the  binding  ***energy** ..of a proton and neutron
>> is say  0.00123.  A M U ... 
>> A M U is in mass 
>> Atomic  mass units A M U 
>>     Bodkin
>> you find the wrong man to argue with 
>> TIA
>> Y.P
>> =====================
>> === ..
>>
>>
>>  
>>
> 
> 
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#701092 — Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!!

On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 7:35:36 PM UTC+3, Sergio wrote:
> On 9/4/2018 11:00 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> > <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Monday, September 3, 2018 at 8:22:51 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> On Monday, September 3, 2018 at 6:15:03 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >>>>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> On Sunday, September 2, 2018 at 4:19:26 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >>>>>>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> can we have energy without mass ??!!
> >>>>>>>> -----
> >>>>>>>> E=m c^2
> >>>>>>>> right ??
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Be careful. That is not saying that energy has mass or that mass is energy.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ===============================you ask me to be careful with mass in energy ?
> >>>>>> ("-)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> may be we have to get new eyes !!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> a blind  one can see there 
> >>>>>> energy that is done by 
> >>>>>> mass s well 
> >>>>>> movement 
> >>>>>> only an over supper  smarty don t see it
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Which has nothing to do with E=mc^2. 
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> that is the problem with you smarties 
> >>>>>> you make big efforts  to  be *over smart*
> >>>>>> unlike me that i make my best 
> >>>>>> to  be as simple as can be  
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Simple is no cure for being incorrectly informed. 
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> i think basic  nature as well does it 
> >>>>>> basic  nature does not know
> >>>>>> your over smarty   mathematics 
> >>>>>> and  supper sophistications  
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Basic nature does what it does, and it s our job to understand what it
> >>>>> does. Nature doesn t give a damn what our common sense says, and nature has
> >>>>> shown over and over again that our common sense is inadequate for
> >>>>> understanding it. 
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Besides, the mathematics is not that difficult for those young enough and
> >>>>> interested enough to learn them. Nor are the ideas of quantum mechanics and
> >>>>> fields all that difficult to grasp.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> =======================================nasty   shameless  crook 
> >>>> do you think i am one of your miserable students ?? 
> >>>> =E = M C^2
> >>>> GOT IT SHAMELESS   CROOK 
> >>>>
> >>>> DO YOU   SEE THAT   M   THERE ?!!!!!!
> >>>> do you think that with your mumble jummle 
> >>>> =i will say it in  words 
> >>>>
> >>>> ENERGY ENERGY !!- IS EQUAL    TO  MASS !! TIMES C^2
> >>>
> >>> It is the energy available from the conversion of rest  mass. It is the
> >>> numerical equality between two different kinds of physical quantities.
> >>
> >> ========================================
> >> only numerical !???
> >> it is numeric   ** times most basic  Dimensions **
> > 
> > Yes only numerical. 
> > 
> > Notice that PV/nR has the same basic dimensions as temperature. But none of
> > those quantities is a temperature. 
> 
> E = M C^2
> 
> E = energy (measured in joules, J)
> m = mass (measured in kilograms, kg)
> c = the speed of light (measured in meters per second, ms -1 ),
> 
> 
> Joules = mass*meter^2/sec^2              (SI units)
> 
> which is what a Joule is defined as.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joule
==================
so ?? SERGIO  
energy has mass 
or not ??
=====
TIA
Y.P
========================
> 
> > 
> > What I just demonstrated with the ideal gas law is also exactly true for
> > E=mc^2. The dimensions of left and right side are the same, but they are
> > different physical quantities. 
> > 
> >> =
> >> you know Bodkin
> >> half of the truth  is a lie !!
> >> don t you know that ?after so many years 
> >>  i wonder what happened to you 
> >> may be it is you who are getting  older ??
> >> LIKE SAY 
> >> 'the  binding  ***energy** ..of a proton and neutron
> >> is say  0.00123.  A M U ... 
> >> A M U is in mass 
> >> Atomic  mass units A M U 
> >>     Bodkin
> >> you find the wrong man to argue with 
> >> TIA
> >> Y.P
> >> =====================
> >> === ..
> >>
> >>
> >>  
> >>
> > 
> > 
> >

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#701093 — Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!!

On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 7:00:28 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, September 3, 2018 at 8:22:51 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Monday, September 3, 2018 at 6:15:03 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >>>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On Sunday, September 2, 2018 at 4:19:26 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >>>>>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> can we have energy without mass ??!!
> >>>>>>> -----
> >>>>>>> E=m c^2
> >>>>>>> right ??
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Be careful. That is not saying that energy has mass or that mass is energy.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> ===============================you ask me to be careful with mass in energy ?
> >>>>> ("-)
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> may be we have to get new eyes !!
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> a blind  one can see there 
> >>>>> energy that is done by 
> >>>>> mass s well 
> >>>>> movement 
> >>>>> only an over supper  smarty don t see it
> >>>> 
> >>>> Which has nothing to do with E=mc^2. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> that is the problem with you smarties 
> >>>>> you make big efforts  to  be *over smart*
> >>>>> unlike me that i make my best 
> >>>>> to  be as simple as can be  
> >>>> 
> >>>> Simple is no cure for being incorrectly informed. 
> >>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> i think basic  nature as well does it 
> >>>>> basic  nature does not know
> >>>>> your over smarty   mathematics 
> >>>>> and  supper sophistications  
> >>>> 
> >>>> Basic nature does what it does, and it s our job to understand what it
> >>>> does. Nature doesn t give a damn what our common sense says, and nature has
> >>>> shown over and over again that our common sense is inadequate for
> >>>> understanding it. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Besides, the mathematics is not that difficult for those young enough and
> >>>> interested enough to learn them. Nor are the ideas of quantum mechanics and
> >>>> fields all that difficult to grasp.
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> =======================================nasty   shameless  crook 
> >>> do you think i am one of your miserable students ?? 
> >>> =E = M C^2
> >>> GOT IT SHAMELESS   CROOK 
> >>> 
> >>> DO YOU   SEE THAT   M   THERE ?!!!!!!
> >>> do you think that with your mumble jummle 
> >>> =i will say it in  words 
> >>> 
> >>> ENERGY ENERGY !!- IS EQUAL    TO  MASS !! TIMES C^2
> >> 
> >> It is the energy available from the conversion of rest  mass. It is the
> >> numerical equality between two different kinds of physical quantities.
> > 
> > ========================================
> > only numerical !???
> > it is numeric   ** times most basic  Dimensions **
> 
> Yes only numerical. 
> 
> Notice that PV/nR has the same basic dimensions as temperature. But none of
> those quantities is a temperature. 
> 
> What I just demonstrated with the ideal gas law is also exactly true for
> E=mc^2. The dimensions of left and right side are the same, but they are
> different physical quantities. 
> 
> > =
> > you know Bodkin
> > half of the truth  is a lie !!
> > don t you know that ?after so many years 
> >  i wonder what happened to you 
> > may be it is you who are getting  older ??
> > LIKE SAY 
> > 'the  binding  ***energy** ..of a proton and neutron
> > is say  0.00123.  A M U ... 
> > A M U is in mass 
> > Atomic  mass units A M U 
> >     Bodkin
> > you find the wrong man to argue with 
> > TIA
> > Y.P
> > ===================== 

and as usual along years !!
while    Bodkin/whatever name  is'' pushed t the corner''
he .........??
disappear!!
nice techniq  .... 
===
Y.POrat
================= 
  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#701100 — Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!!

<poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 7:00:28 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Monday, September 3, 2018 at 8:22:51 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, September 3, 2018 at 6:15:03 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sunday, September 2, 2018 at 4:19:26 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>>>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> can we have energy without mass ??!!
>>>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>>>> E=m c^2
>>>>>>>>> right ??
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Be careful. That is not saying that energy has mass or that mass is energy.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> ===============================you ask me to be careful with mass in energy ?
>>>>>>> ("-)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> may be we have to get new eyes !!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> a blind  one can see there 
>>>>>>> energy that is done by 
>>>>>>> mass s well 
>>>>>>> movement 
>>>>>>> only an over supper  smarty don t see it
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Which has nothing to do with E=mc^2. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> that is the problem with you smarties 
>>>>>>> you make big efforts  to  be *over smart*
>>>>>>> unlike me that i make my best 
>>>>>>> to  be as simple as can be  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Simple is no cure for being incorrectly informed. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> i think basic  nature as well does it 
>>>>>>> basic  nature does not know
>>>>>>> your over smarty   mathematics 
>>>>>>> and  supper sophistications  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Basic nature does what it does, and it s our job to understand what it
>>>>>> does. Nature doesn t give a damn what our common sense says, and nature has
>>>>>> shown over and over again that our common sense is inadequate for
>>>>>> understanding it. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Besides, the mathematics is not that difficult for those young enough and
>>>>>> interested enough to learn them. Nor are the ideas of quantum mechanics and
>>>>>> fields all that difficult to grasp.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> =======================================nasty   shameless  crook 
>>>>> do you think i am one of your miserable students ?? 
>>>>> =E = M C^2
>>>>> GOT IT SHAMELESS   CROOK 
>>>>> 
>>>>> DO YOU   SEE THAT   M   THERE ?!!!!!!
>>>>> do you think that with your mumble jummle 
>>>>> =i will say it in  words 
>>>>> 
>>>>> ENERGY ENERGY !!- IS EQUAL    TO  MASS !! TIMES C^2
>>>> 
>>>> It is the energy available from the conversion of rest  mass. It is the
>>>> numerical equality between two different kinds of physical quantities.
>>> 
>>> ========================================
>>> only numerical !???
>>> it is numeric   ** times most basic  Dimensions **
>> 
>> Yes only numerical. 
>> 
>> Notice that PV/nR has the same basic dimensions as temperature. But none of
>> those quantities is a temperature. 
>> 
>> What I just demonstrated with the ideal gas law is also exactly true for
>> E=mc^2. The dimensions of left and right side are the same, but they are
>> different physical quantities. 
>> 
>>> =
>>> you know Bodkin
>>> half of the truth  is a lie !!
>>> don t you know that ?after so many years 
>>> i wonder what happened to you 
>>> may be it is you who are getting  older ??
>>> LIKE SAY 
>>> 'the  binding  ***energy** ..of a proton and neutron
>>> is say  0.00123.  A M U ... 
>>> A M U is in mass 
>>> Atomic  mass units A M U 
>>> Bodkin
>>> you find the wrong man to argue with 
>>> TIA
>>> Y.P
>>> ===================== 
> 
> and as usual along years !!
> while    Bodkin/whatever name  is'' pushed t the corner''
> he .........??
> disappear!!
> nice techniq  .... 
> ===
> Y.POrat
> ================= 
>   
> 

Look Porat, I will make a point. Often, this point will illustrate that you
don’t have much idea what you’re talking about. When I’ve done that, I’m
done. 

I’m not here to engage with you in a protracted discussion, as most of what
you say is either wrong or unintelligible anyway. I’m also not here to be
counted among those you consider allies or enemies — that’s not what this
group is for. Finally, you are WAY too interested in personal glory, and my
suggestion is to be happy with the accomplishments of your professional
career and stop tarnishing it with the foolishness of an old man hungry for
fame. 

-- 
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#701105 — Re: CAN WE HAVE ENERGY- WITHOUT MASS ??!!

On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 9:02:36 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 7:00:28 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Monday, September 3, 2018 at 8:22:51 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >>>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On Monday, September 3, 2018 at 6:15:03 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >>>>>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Sunday, September 2, 2018 at 4:19:26 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >>>>>>>> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> can we have energy without mass ??!!
> >>>>>>>>> -----
> >>>>>>>>> E=m c^2
> >>>>>>>>> right ??
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> Be careful. That is not saying that energy has mass or that mass is energy.
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> ===============================you ask me to be careful with mass in energy ?
> >>>>>>> ("-)
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> may be we have to get new eyes !!
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> a blind  one can see there 
> >>>>>>> energy that is done by 
> >>>>>>> mass s well 
> >>>>>>> movement 
> >>>>>>> only an over supper  smarty don t see it
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Which has nothing to do with E=mc^2. 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> that is the problem with you smarties 
> >>>>>>> you make big efforts  to  be *over smart*
> >>>>>>> unlike me that i make my best 
> >>>>>>> to  be as simple as can be  
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Simple is no cure for being incorrectly informed. 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> i think basic  nature as well does it 
> >>>>>>> basic  nature does not know
> >>>>>>> your over smarty   mathematics 
> >>>>>>> and  supper sophistications  
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Basic nature does what it does, and it s our job to understand what it
> >>>>>> does. Nature doesn t give a damn what our common sense says, and nature has
> >>>>>> shown over and over again that our common sense is inadequate for
> >>>>>> understanding it. 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Besides, the mathematics is not that difficult for those young enough and
> >>>>>> interested enough to learn them. Nor are the ideas of quantum mechanics and
> >>>>>> fields all that difficult to grasp.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> =======================================nasty   shameless  crook 
> >>>>> do you think i am one of your miserable students ?? 
> >>>>> =E = M C^2
> >>>>> GOT IT SHAMELESS   CROOK 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> DO YOU   SEE THAT   M   THERE ?!!!!!!
> >>>>> do you think that with your mumble jummle 
> >>>>> =i will say it in  words 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> ENERGY ENERGY !!- IS EQUAL    TO  MASS !! TIMES C^2
> >>>> 
> >>>> It is the energy available from the conversion of rest  mass. It is the
> >>>> numerical equality between two different kinds of physical quantities.
> >>> 
> >>> ========================================
> >>> only numerical !???
> >>> it is numeric   ** times most basic  Dimensions **
> >> 
> >> Yes only numerical. 
> >> 
> >> Notice that PV/nR has the same basic dimensions as temperature. But none of
> >> those quantities is a temperature. 
> >> 
> >> What I just demonstrated with the ideal gas law is also exactly true for
> >> E=mc^2. The dimensions of left and right side are the same, but they are
> >> different physical quantities. 
> >> 
> >>> =
> >>> you know Bodkin
> >>> half of the truth  is a lie !!
> >>> don t you know that ?after so many years 
> >>> i wonder what happened to you 
> >>> may be it is you who are getting  older ??
> >>> LIKE SAY 
> >>> 'the  binding  ***energy** ..of a proton and neutron
> >>> is say  0.00123.  A M U ... 
> >>> A M U is in mass 
> >>> Atomic  mass units A M U 
> >>> Bodkin
> >>> you find the wrong man to argue with 
> >>> TIA
> >>> Y.P
> >>> ===================== 
> > 
> > and as usual along years !!
> > while    Bodkin/whatever name  is'' pushed t the corner''
> > he .........??
> > disappear!!
> > nice techniq  .... 
> > ===
> > Y.POrat
> > ================= 
> >   
> > 
> 
> Look Porat, I will make a point. Often, this point will illustrate that you
> don’t have much idea what you’re talking about. When I’ve done that, I’m
> done. 
> 
> I’m not here to engage with you in a protracted discussion, as most of what
> you say is either wrong or unintelligible anyway. I’m also not here to be
> counted among those you consider allies or enemies — that’s not what this
> group is for. Finally, you are WAY too interested in personal glory, and my
> suggestion is to be happy with the accomplishments of your professional
> career and stop tarnishing it with the foolishness of an old man hungry for
> fame. 
> 
> -- 
> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

================
do you think that by mumble jumble 
you can confuse me or anyone else 
here it is again 
==========================
if the*** well known binding  ENERGY
between proton and neutron is say 
0.03  A M U 
AMU in case you dont know 
is 
Atomic  **Mass!!!!!!! Unit 
so do you see the** mass** there  
if not
do you thing you can boggle   others people mind 
while they know somweth in physics 
may be a bit better than you know ??!!
or may be 
you have not the slightest knowledge about it

IN PHYSICS !!
and you turn you ignorance 
on  someone   else ??
or may be even you understand nothing about my above explanation ?
===
TIA
Y.P
===================== 
 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web