The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: toe  (Read 737 times)

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
toe
« on: 01/10/2015 18:42:28 »
toe={E=W}

No energy , no work gets done, no Universe, no existence.

https://theoristexplains.wordpress.com/2015/10/02/the-theory-of-everything-conclusion-ewue/
« Last Edit: 03/10/2015 00:39:16 by Thebox »


 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: toe
« Reply #1 on: 03/10/2015 14:17:29 »
Beginning to wonder why I  even bother straining my brain to think so deep .....
 

Offline ProjectSailor

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 83
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: toe
« Reply #2 on: 08/10/2015 13:54:16 »
Brilliant! it all works out..

Flow = Volume
Petrol = Engine
Velocity = Acceleration!

Well done Thebox...

I only replied to equate your 'equations'

W = change in energy... so of course it equals energy but not in the way you write and is certainly not even approaching a theory of everything..
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: toe
« Reply #3 on: 08/10/2015 14:26:56 »
Brilliant! it all works out..

Flow = Volume
Petrol = Engine
Velocity = Acceleration!

Well done Thebox...

I only replied to equate your 'equations'

W = change in energy... so of course it equals energy but not in the way you write and is certainly not even approaching a theory of everything..


Well if you agree the big bang was the start of everything, then my simplistic view is correct.   If there was no energy, the work of the big bang could of not happened.


Think about it for a while and you will get it.


energy,work,universe,existence, simplistic to everything. 
  E=W not W=E

work means an action,

ΔE=W=p      where E is energy and W is work and p is momentum.

+q=+w=+p=+Ke

-q=-W=-p=-Ke


Quantum mechanics almost has got reality spot on.



« Last Edit: 08/10/2015 14:58:27 by Thebox »
 

Offline ProjectSailor

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 83
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: toe
« Reply #4 on: 08/10/2015 16:59:25 »
No.. If there were no energy.. and then there was.. work has been done.. change in energy = work

and one thing.. if you have an '=' it doesnt matter which way round it is since is an EQUALITY.. they are the same.
Work is also the change of momentum!.. since.. omg.. its the change in kinetic energy.. omg..

Work is only negative and positive in relation to a frame of reference.. i.e. input work and output work.. this is the principle of thermodynamics.. the conservation of energy..

Think of work like speed.. (actually no don't you will only get confused) depending on your frame of reference you can describe it as positive speed or negative speed.. when what you are actually talking about is velocity.

In a nutshell.. Work is the change of energy.. if and i mean IF there was no energy before the big bang.. then the universe is the product of the work the big bang caused i.e. the total change of energy
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: toe
« Reply #5 on: 08/10/2015 18:18:26 »
No.. If there were no energy.. and then there was.. work has been done.. change in energy = work

and one thing.. if you have an '=' it doesnt matter which way round it is since is an EQUALITY.. they are the same.
Work is also the change of momentum!.. since.. omg.. its the change in kinetic energy.. omg..

Work is only negative and positive in relation to a frame of reference.. i.e. input work and output work.. this is the principle of thermodynamics.. the conservation of energy..

Think of work like speed.. (actually no don't you will only get confused) depending on your frame of reference you can describe it as positive speed or negative speed.. when what you are actually talking about is velocity.

In a nutshell.. Work is the change of energy.. if and i mean IF there was no energy before the big bang.. then the universe is the product of the work the big bang caused i.e. the total change of energy


Work is not speed,


''Work done is defined as product of the force and the distance over which the force is applied. Work is done when a force is applied to an object and the object is moved through a distance.''


But this does not take into consideration Quantum mechanics and the work done of sub-atomic particles relative to each other.   Even in a ''stationary'' object, there is always work being done.

Energy makes the action of work, that makes an action of kinetic energy. 

Things do not move or vibrate if there is no work being done by energy.

The electrostatic connection of subatomic particles is work being done by the negative polarities attracting to the positives to hold the bond together, while the positive versus positive is doing the work of trying to expand the mass and trying to accelerate away from each other.


« Last Edit: 08/10/2015 18:49:05 by Thebox »
 

Offline ProjectSailor

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 83
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: toe
« Reply #6 on: 09/10/2015 10:49:39 »
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_(thermodynamics) actually separates this too.. I was trying to use a broad definition to help you being to understand

But since both discuss the transfer of energy from one system to another... consider a heat exchanger transferring heat from one system to another.. this has a duty rated in Watts the same as work done, but we are led away from calling it work since it complicates the matter.

I don't need a lecture on the macroscopic and microscopic forms of energy transfers.. I just call these distinctions lies to children. A way of simplifying things to ensure people follow the rules throughout.. but it leads to stupid claims like the above.

Work is defined by deltaE whether it be kinetic or potential, and in the same discussion of saying heat transfer is not part of work they show the internal energy changes only by the difference between the heat energy input and the work output of the closed system.. i.e. they equate. but this does not mean this approaches a theory of everything.. it is common sense (until you get deep and dirty with thermodynamics and realise why you segregate them)

by the way.. W=F.s is a nice equation.. but it will really not help with 99.9% of energy transfers.. and it does take these into account since it is 100% proven.. and it does take all of that into account since it is measurable and powers what you are writing on at the moment.

NO... TRANSFER of energy make work.. yes.. if there is no energy there is no work done.. there cant be.. if you dont have anything to transfer then you can't transfer it.. Imaginary sandwich again!

All your thoughts are why this distinction was made to stop you confusing things.. read the wiki page i posted which hopefully will enlighten you on the long range forces and the work entailed. I don't know enough about quantum physics to say that the laws of thermodynamics are clearly operating at that scale but I would be fairly surprised if they don't (it may just need to read more into the law)

 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: toe
« Reply #7 on: 09/10/2015 18:15:46 »
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_(thermodynamics) actually separates this too.. I was trying to use a broad definition to help you being to understand

But since both discuss the transfer of energy from one system to another... consider a heat exchanger transferring heat from one system to another.. this has a duty rated in Watts the same as work done, but we are led away from calling it work since it complicates the matter.

I don't need a lecture on the macroscopic and microscopic forms of energy transfers.. I just call these distinctions lies to children. A way of simplifying things to ensure people follow the rules throughout.. but it leads to stupid claims like the above.

Work is defined by deltaE whether it be kinetic or potential, and in the same discussion of saying heat transfer is not part of work they show the internal energy changes only by the difference between the heat energy input and the work output of the closed system.. i.e. they equate. but this does not mean this approaches a theory of everything.. it is common sense (until you get deep and dirty with thermodynamics and realise why you segregate them)

by the way.. W=F.s is a nice equation.. but it will really not help with 99.9% of energy transfers.. and it does take these into account since it is 100% proven.. and it does take all of that into account since it is measurable and powers what you are writing on at the moment.

NO... TRANSFER of energy make work.. yes.. if there is no energy there is no work done.. there cant be.. if you dont have anything to transfer then you can't transfer it.. Imaginary sandwich again!

All your thoughts are why this distinction was made to stop you confusing things.. read the wiki page i posted which hopefully will enlighten you on the long range forces and the work entailed. I don't know enough about quantum physics to say that the laws of thermodynamics are clearly operating at that scale but I would be fairly surprised if they don't (it may just need to read more into the law)
]

I do not misunderstand thermodynamics and the entropy of a system, the transfer of energy does make work you are incorrect.   



My video model clearly shows the negative monopole particles receiving energy that polarises  the particles creating a force and acceleration, i.e work.

No positive energy, no work, no motion, no action, no mass, no gravity, no creation, .





« Last Edit: 09/10/2015 18:19:29 by Thebox »
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: toe
« Reply #7 on: 09/10/2015 18:15:46 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
 
Login
Login with username, password and session length