Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: Yahya on 18/05/2015 17:55:44
-
[:D]
-
Generating force from nothing
If we have two opposite equal forces that affects an object so that the forces does not make displacement , i.e. No work is done then the forces can increase continuously without limit and without any external force just by itself and from nothing!! This is the concept of generating force from nothing.
Proof:
This experiment shows that the above concept is true, it uses the idea of canceling one force of the two mutual attraction forces between magnets :
1, 2 , 3 ,4 are identical magnets, 5 is an spring , that conserve energy ,the distance between magnets 1 and 2 equals distance between magnets 3 and 4 , magnets 1 and 3 are connected together using brown bar, the brown bar goes inside magnet 2 with little friction.
So as a result of this the two magnets 1 and 3 can move toward magnet 4 with little force , if we consider there is little friction forces , because the repel force between magnet 1 and 2 cancel the attraction force between magnet 3 and 4 since the four magnets are identical and the distances are equal .
But!! What about magnet 4 its attraction force increases AND ALSO DECREASES while we move the two magnets 1 and 2 from left to right, there should be change in force , while we do exert little external force to the system.
Conclusion:
The force exerted by magnet 4 on the lower grey surface and the upper grey surface increases with exerting little external force. also can be decreased without external forces , as a result of the coming back of the spring This a proof of the above concept of generating force from nothing.
I do not understand or get it, you claim to generate a force from nothing then go on to add four magnets, so you are generating a force using magnets and not nothing which you claimed?
-
Generating force from nothing
If we have two opposite equal forces that affects an object so that the forces does not make displacement , i.e. No work is done then the forces can increase continuously without limit and without any external force just by itself and from nothing!! This is the concept of generating force from nothing.
Wrong. You can't have a force acting on a body if there's nothing to cause the force to begin with. What you're really talking about is the principle of superposition. For example: Let there be a box lying on the x-axis of a Cartesian coordinate system. Then
Let FL be the force acting on the left side of he body in the direction of +x that would act on the body if there was no counter force.
Let FR be the force acting on the right side of he body in the direction of -x that would act on the body if there was no counter force.
Adjust the forces so that they have equal magnitude. Then
FTotal = FL + FR = 0
However this is impossible to do unless there is something which causes the force to begin with. The important thing to keep in mind about this situation is that the case where FL and FR are non-zero is quite different than the case where each is zero. The difference is that when the forces are not zero there is stress inside the object.
Special relativity tells us that in a frame moving parallel to the x-axis where the box is not at rest the stress in the box contributes to the mass of the body. So your assertion is quite wrong for many reasons as is your proof.
So now let's consider your proof. You wrote;
Proof:
This experiment shows that the above concept is true, it uses the idea of canceling one force of the two mutual attraction forces between magnets :
The example in no way shows that the above is true. That's something you have to prove. You can't assume it. By the way. Where did these magnets come from? You didn't mention them before your proof and didn't explain what role they play in your proof.
I read your proof and it made no sense to me. I'll try again later after I eat something. :)
-
.....suppose the car moved towards the other surface with very little force (no friction) and the car moved totally from the first surface to the second one, now this contradict you said no force can act on a body if there is not something cause the force to begin, the force acted on the second surface by moving the car with force tend to zero.
On the 1st surface the force W is due to the weight of the car. The force on the second surface is also W due to the weight of the car. All you have done is move the weight from one place to another, the weight causes the downward force.
The force you applied to move the car acted on the car not the surfaces, it's magnitude is irrelevant.
-
yes , I did so, just refer to what pmbphy said and what I said to see why I presented this example.
I did and your reply to PmbPhy did not contradict what he said. He is talking about Newtons laws, what you are presenting is not.
also I increased stress on surface 2 with force tend to zero by collecting more cars, just refer to what I wrote.
Again, I did refer to what you wrote. I understand what you are doing, but it does not contradict what PmbPhy wrote.
You and he are referring to 2 totally different things.
-
Wrong. You can't have a force acting on a body if there's nothing to cause the force to begin with.
yes I can. this example will illustrate that I am right an you are wrong :
imagine that there are two surfaces which are perfectly horizontal , they are also identical and they are exactly at the same height ,one surface is very close to the other however they are distinct they don't touch, now there is a car on the first surface this car has a particular weight W and the first surface exerts a normal force on it equals W , there is not any forces on the other surface , however suppose the car moved towards the other surface with very little force (no friction) and the car moved totally from the first surface to the second one, now this contradict you said no force can act on a body if there is not something cause the force to begin, the force acted on the second surface by moving the car with force tend to zero. also we can increase the normal force on surface 2 by collecting other cars!! moving those other cars with forces tend to zero , also review my above experiment it also shows this.
The example in no way shows that the above is true. That's something you have to prove. You can't assume it. By the way. Where did these magnets come from? You didn't mention them before your proof and didn't explain what role they play in your proof.
the example uses magnets but I wanted to extract from the example the concept. force is force whether it is magnetic or electric etc , if we have magnetic force increases without external force then we can have other forces to have the same feature.
Let me define nothing for you, a void, no surfaces, no magnets, empty space that doe snot even contain light.
A force is a product of process and not a thing itself. That is why you can not produce a force from nothing. Without something it does not exist.
quite simple physics really.
-
A force is a product of process and not a thing itself. That is why you can not produce a force from nothing.
quite simple physics really.
yes a force is a factor that affects object ,I agree with basic physics but I do not agree with your logic that force is not a thing by itself so it can't be produced from nothing, I want to ask you something , how a force acts between two objects that have distance between them? it seems that while a force is not a thing by itself then it needs some kind of connector to do its job , in other words force needs matter to transfer it to other objects , I who is a person will be able to produce force and increase it and decreased because I am a thing , also the effect of gravitational force is every where in the universe , also it increases and decreases according to places in vacuum not according a person who is a thing to do the job , generating force from nothing means in creasing it or decreasing without an external factor , but this something noticeable in universe gravity increases or decreases every where without the thing you mentioned , all I did is increasing it in field without doing work ,but that is just according to your interpretation for " a force is not a thing by itself" , the true interpretation is : force is not a thing by itself it needs something to act on to appear, if there is something exists to act on then it can be measured it can be increased it can be decreased and it can be generated from nothing, my above two experiments are real world and not some kind of philosophy.
Firstly gravity decreases by increased radial distance to a distance where the force of gravity becomes negligible. Space is full of energy but not full of gravity, I personally perceive this energy connects all matter, a sort of conduit for forces. Force does not derive from nothing, there has to be interaction, a coupling to observe force. A falling object has no force until it hits something.
That however is not a force from nothing.
F=ma from Newton, do you understand this?
-
A falling object has no force until it hits something.
what ?!! who told you that?!!
F=ma from Newton, do you understand this?
I think you do not understand this equation a falling object undergoes an acceleration which is acceleration of gravity and has mass, so it has force , however I never referred to acceleration, I did not referred to this equation , they are two equal forces in opposite directions, so you misunderstand basic physics and misunderstand me.
The falling object has no force why it is falling, the force making it fall is gravity. Any force incurred is by collision of two bodies. There is no applied pushing force on a falling object, it is a pulling force by gravity.
Force = mass*acceleration, I understand this very well and could rewrite it, if it it had a use.
Do you understand that a body in space is practically massless? and increases in mass the nearer it gets to a gravitational field?
An object that is not influenced by gravity is weightless and massless.
There is no Newtons of force being applied in a gravity area where G becomes negligible.
Force is a process of events rather than a thing itself.
I am a crackpot and even I understand basic concepts.
Jump out of a plane with a ten ton weight on your head, while you are falling the force on your head will be zero, Fn=0.
Me or you falling opposes no equal or opposite force because we are going the same direction.
When we hit the ground then Newtons 3rd law applies , and the ground ''pushes'' back creating force.
Two points of contact are always needed to produce force.
Nothing space can not produce a force without something being involved.
example I breath out, I force the air to move.
-
Do you understand that a body in space is practically massless? and increases in mass the nearer it gets to a gravitational field?
An object that is not influenced by gravity is weightless and massless.
Hi this is just for box.
You are doing surprisingly well in this and other posts. Interesting to see you defending science [;)]
Hint, don't weaken your argument. An object can have mass, but might not have weight. Weight depends where it is in a gravity field. In some circumstances mass could be thought of as the potential for weight. If you accelerate a mass in 0g it has inertia.
Keep up the good thinking!
-
Do you understand that a body in space is practically massless? and increases in mass the nearer it gets to a gravitational field?
An object that is not influenced by gravity is weightless and massless.
Hi this is just for box.
You are doing surprisingly well in this and other posts. Interesting to see you defending science [;)]
Hint, don't weaken your argument. An object can have mass, but might not have weight. Weight depends where it is in a gravity field. In some circumstances mass could be thought of as the potential for weight. If you accelerate a mass in 0g it has inertia.
Keep up the good thinking!
Thank you, and yes of cause, weight being Newtons.
-
I started patenting this device to use it in the future.
Use it for what exactly?
I personally see no use for a magnet on a bar, try magnetic suspension, or maglev, science is already good with magnets,
-
[:D]
-
yes I can. this example will illustrate that I am right an you are wrong :
Only in your dreams. It's a well known fact in physics that what you're claiming to be true is demonstratingly false.
imagine that there are two surfaces which are perfectly horizontal , they are also identical and they are exactly at the same height ,
Are these two surfaces side by side? If not then you can't have two surfaces which are perfectly horizontal at the same height. They'd be the same surface.
one surface is very close to the other however they are distinct they don't touch, now there is a car on the first surface this car has a particular weight W ..
Weight is a force. So you're starting off your proof that you force from no force by using a force to begin your argument? Sorry but that's a logical fallacy.
and the first surface exerts a normal force on it equals W ,
Why? What is the source of the force W? Is it the gravitational field of the surface or the Earth?
there is not any forces on the other surface ,
Why not? If the weight W is generated by the Earth then it exerts a force on the surface too due to the weight of the surface.
however suppose the car moved towards the other surface with very little force (no friction) and the car moved totally from the first surface to the second one, now this contradict you said no force can act on a body if there is not something cause the force to begin,
False. I never made such a claim. It would violate Newton's first law of motion. Force is only required to accelerate a body. Not to make it move. You incorrectly claimed that I said something when I never said it. Please don't do that again.
the force acted on the second surface by moving the car with force tend to zero.
That's extremely unclear. You're description is terribly flawed and confused. You talk about "the force acted on the second surface" without stating the source of this force.
also we can increase the normal force on surface 2 by collecting other cars!! moving those other cars with forces tend to zero ,
That also makes no sense and is totally unjustified. Just because you can write down words beside each other it doesn't make it a logically valid argument. E.g. your claim "moving those other cars with forces tend to zero ," is meaningless and without justification.
So once more you not only proved that you don't know what you're talking about but that your writing skills leave a great deal to be desired.
-
A falling object has no force until it hits something.
It's amazing how many basic things you get wrong. In Newtonian mechanics (not general relativity) a falling object is subject to two forces. One is the force of gravity given by Fg = -mg where m is the objects mass and g is the strength of the gravitational field and the other is the drag force due to the atmosphere Fd. The sum of these two forces is the force on the falling object and is given by the principle of superposition, i.e.
F = Fg + Fd
This force is most certainly not zero. If the object is falling in a vacuum then all that's left is the gravitational force and that too is not zero.
Had you actually chosen to start reading a physics text when we all first suggested it then you'd know this like the back of your hand by now. But since you insist of refusing to follow anybody's advice you remain ignorant of even the most simple physics.
-
A falling object has no force until it hits something.
It's amazing how many basic things you get wrong. In Newtonian mechanics (not general relativity) a falling object is subject to two forces. One is the force of gravity given by Fg = -mg where m is the objects mass and g is the strength of the gravitational field and the other is the drag force due to the atmosphere Fd. The sum of these two forces is the force on the falling object and is given by the principle of superposition, i.e.
F = Fg + Fd
This force is most certainly not zero. If the object is falling in a vacuum then all that's left is the gravitational force and that too is not zero.
Had you actually chosen to start reading a physics text when we all first suggested it then you'd know this like the back of your hand by now. But since you insist of refusing to follow anybody's advice you remain ignorant of even the most simple physics.
Well I benefited greatly by reading the books I did. I have only learned a tiny fraction but is enough to get me started. It only took just over a year to get where I am and well worth it. I suppose most amateur posters have better things to do with their spare time. So why challenge science? Go and watch some TV or movies instead. That'll give them the Hollywood type science that suits them best.