Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #700740
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics |
| Subject | Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? |
| Date | 2018-09-01 20:04 +0000 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <pmercf$14hl$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | <2b189f54-b41e-4f11-8ddd-b04ac072595a@googlegroups.com> <pmeb9u$9eb$1@gioia.aioe.org> <fbnlodll0gpbas5lnotb2ifvb3goqj14qt@4ax.com> |
Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote: > fOn Sat, 1 Sep 2018 15:30:06 +0000 (UTC), Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> <poraty149@gmail.com> wrote: >>> What is more basic >>> >>> Energy >>> or mass ?? >>> ====== >>> TIA >>> Y.Porat >>> ========================== >>> >>> >> >> Energy. >> >> Our ARBITRARY choice of base dimensions is a historical accident. Humans >> just didnt understand how central energy was before they set up units for >> length, time, and mass. Had we known then what we know now, energy would >> have been one of the fundamental dimensions and mass and length and time >> would have been defined in term of that. > > I get that energy could be a base unit instead of mass, but wouldn't > length and time still be base units? Certainly not both. Length or time is all that’s needed at best as that’s what’s set up now. > > One of the problems with the base unit for mass is that it references > a lump of metal in a locked vault. And that is being phased out in terms of Avogadro’s number, in the same way that the standard of length is defined by the standard of time and a fundamental constant, which functionally serves as a conversion factor in exactly the same way that 2.54cm=1in. > > Time and length can be related to a portable standard based on light > of known wavelength. > > How would an energy standard be more portable than the lump of metal > that is the mass standard? One can define, for example anything that serves as a highly stable carrier of energy - rest energy of one mole of protons, perhaps. I think the day and age of having a stored physical artifact that represents a standard unit, like an iridium meter bar or a kilogram ball, are passing quickly in terms of standards based on physical constants. > > >> You make the mistake of believing that the way you were taught is the >> physically natural way of thinking rather than the by product of historical >> accident and arbitrary choices. >> >> You know why we have seconds at all? Because Sumerians 6000 years ago were >> fascinated by the numbers 12 and 60. No other reason. > > -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-01 06:54 -0700
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 15:30 +0000
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 11:38 -0400
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 15:50 +0000
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 12:09 -0400
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 16:34 +0000
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-01 11:21 -0700
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-01 11:04 -0700
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-09-01 14:48 -0400
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 20:04 +0000
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-09-01 15:00 -0700
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-01 19:17 -0700
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 02:27 +0000
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-02 02:28 -0700
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-09-02 19:57 +1000
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-02 06:26 -0700
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 13:39 +0000
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-09-02 10:45 -0400
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 12:17 -0400
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 18:57 +0000
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-09-03 08:41 +1000
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-09-02 15:48 -0700
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-02 20:10 -0700
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-09-03 11:51 -0700
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-09-03 17:49 -0700
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-03 22:47 -0700
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-09-04 13:06 -0700
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-09-04 13:11 -0700
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-04 21:32 -0700
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 13:19 +0000
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-02 06:40 -0700
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 07:19 -0700
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 12:18 -0400
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 18:57 +0000
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 12:20 -0400
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-09-02 11:45 -0700
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 18:57 +0000
Re: WHAT IS MORE BASIC ? ! - ENERGY - OR MASS ?? Horatio Trollmeister <invalid@example.com> - 2018-09-01 15:46 -0700
csiph-web