0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

If you really want to show me, that theoretical physicists aren't only just a bunch of overconfident snobs

I would like to present you the only correct model of gravity and energy distribution in relative motion. I've spent around 6 weeks and wasted some 8 pages format a5 on calculations

a bunch of overconfident

Here's a simple scenario: 4 objects

I wonder, what then can explain all those generations of professional physicsts, who didn't even think about trying to calculate such things.

Ok, so here is the extended formula of mass/enetgy equivalence

A moving body may or may not have potential energy in addition to it's kinetic energy( dependent on the observer's frame of reference

However none of this will solve the three( or greater ) body problem.

Quote from: CrazyScientist on 26/10/2022 16:38:56Ok, so here is the extended formula of mass/enetgy equivalence That is not a mass/energy equation since your equation is saying mass = mass or energy = energy since you could also write your equation as

But Isn't this exactky the thing about equations of equivalence, that makes both sides of such equation equivalent?

Quote from: CrazyScientist on 26/10/2022 21:05:47But Isn't this exactky the thing about equations of equivalence, that makes both sides of such equation equivalent?Nope. equals since equals 1 so we now have and since equals m, your equation simplifies to . So this is not very enlightening and certainly not an energy/mass equivalency equation.

It's the mass of an object at rest - so m0=m is actually true.