1

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Can a mass be lifted with force less than its weight ?

« on: 11/12/2024 07:23:19 »

Hi.

I can't think of any biological lever with a mechanical advantage greater than 1.

    I don't know.....  my sister had a nasty technique.
    Put their head between your left upper arm and your body,  then use your other arm, the right arm to grab the edge of your left arm and pull it inwards.    You should have your right arm further from the fulcrum (your armpit) than their head.

Best Wishes.

Hello Eternal Student,
Your sister exactly used her head as an external fulcrum to build a lever but tha is not possible for a natural body formation.

2

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Can a mass be lifted with force less than its weight ?

« on: 11/12/2024 07:19:48 »

I can't think of any biological lever with a mechanical advantage greater than 1.

That caught my interesting. The human skeleton can not contain a lever that has mechanical advantage greater than one since the characteristics of such lever requires a fulcrum outside the human body the biological leverage actually is embedded physiologically inside the body making it the greater-than-one lever for organisms reminds me of differences in mechanisms in organisms and machines like an airplane vs a bird.

3

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Can a mass be lifted with force less than its weight ?

« on: 10/12/2024 13:38:27 »

The weight of an object is defined as the force required to lift it. So the question is absurd.

Hello Alan, yes the weight of an object is defined as the force required to lift it, now an answer to my question might be yes via levers now I want to answer it further by adding the biological leverage. My experiments use weight and mechanical advantage which violates your defintion above unless there is a sort of biological leverage. Tools, devices and systems have corresponding biological ones there is a possibility that the lever as a tool is originaly biological.

4

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Can a mass be lifted with force less than its weight ?

« on: 10/12/2024 09:24:54 »

Hello,
I would like to share an updated version of my paper it is available on SSRN:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5037417
Thank you

5

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Can a mass be lifted with force less than its weight ?

« on: 27/06/2024 10:08:14 »

I think you didn't get me. The pulley is free to rotate, the smaller mass is exerting force equals to its gravity on the bigger mass, so you need to exert force equals:
Mg-mg
M: mass of the bigger object
m: mass of the smaller object
Actually if the masses are equal, in theory you can exert the smallest force but to accelerate it in a short time to lift it you need to exert the force for the time you want. See the drawing.

6

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Can a mass be lifted with force less than its weight ?

« on: 27/06/2024 05:18:22 »

A different take...

Can a mass be lifted with force less than its weight ?

Yes, if it is in a liquid to provide some buoyancy...
- and the weight is measured in air

That's why elderly people do "Aqua-Aerobics".

Hello Evan_au,
Yes it's true that doing that exercise will require less force, but the resultant force is the force by muscles plus the buoyant force  the same force when doing that outside water. A similar example is a mass balanced with a pulley; pulled upwards by another mass less in weight you will always lift the bigger mass with force less than its weight because it is pulled upwards by the rope by the smaller mass gravity.

7

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Can a mass be lifted with force less than its weight ?

« on: 23/06/2024 15:17:03 »

I lift with my only feet muscles

YAS is an octopus or an alien.

Its along time since your funny comments, thanks Alan I actually adopted that acronym.

8

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Can a mass be lifted with force less than its weight ?

« on: 23/06/2024 15:04:37 »

It is SSRN, it is not a predatory journal it is not even a journal:
Biological Leverage in Humans and Animals' Self-Movement
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4794848

9

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Is the energy destroyed in this experiment?

« on: 29/06/2023 17:20:48 »

Suppose you stand on a spherical permanent magnet in space and you hold an iron ball in your hand, you can neglect the gravity force by this magnet mass. You stand and throw the iron ball upwards with some kinetic energy, the ball will eventually stops at some height because it is attracted by the magnet you stand on , now at that exact moment we heated the magnet and the magnet lost its force, so at that exact moment when the ball stops " v=0" no force is acting on the ball the permanent magnet was demagnetized. The iron ball will remain at stationary as Newton first law states, the iron ball has no any kind of energy, neither kinetic energy"since v=0 at the highest point" nor potential energy" magnetic force dropped to zero" however you actually exerted kinetic energy to throw the ball to reach that height " what is supposed to happen is the ball should return back to the magnet with the same kinetic energy you exerted or at least it should have the capability to do the work at any time so your kinetic energy was stored not consumed and destroyed .

10

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Can a mass be lifted with force less than its weight ?

« on: 17/06/2023 17:45:09 »

My final work with experimental evidence:
Sharif, Y. A. (2023). Living Body Special Mass; A New Theory. International Astronomy and Astrophysics Research Journal, 5(1), 59?64. Retrieved from https://journaliaarj.com/index.php/IAARJ/article/view/83

11

New Theories / Re: Gravity as a unity force

« on: 08/04/2023 23:10:01 »

what sort of reply did you want?

Your answer. But you didn't answer me, you replied it is philosophy and Newton admitted he couldn't know it.

12

New Theories / Re: Gravity as a unity force

« on: 08/04/2023 23:05:37 »

Gravity is masses tendency to unify and fill all the gaps between them by attraction force between all the masses in the universe to form a one-block of matter with no gaps like what the masses of the universe were before, a unified singularity.

Assuming this is Correct(it's Not)...

What then Broke the Unity?

The definition of unity is: it is one block of the universe masses with no gaps between them. What broke the singularity is that part of this singularity energy transformed to mass and because mass always has dimensions and cannot compress in a singularity an explosion happened and all the masses flied in space, part of the singularity energy became masses, planets, stars, etc, and part of the energy became kinetic energy to move the planets, etc, , but because the universe was a zero-dimensional point "a singularity" before it exploded,  the universe masses still tend to be a point by gravity attraction to fill the gaps. This is similar to a spring with length L when you pull the spring it stretches to become longer but it is still tend to shrink to its original length with some potential force.

13

New Theories / Re: Gravity as a unity force

« on: 07/04/2023 15:55:18 »

Gravity is masses tendency to unify and fill all the gaps between them by attraction force between all the masses in the universe to form a one-block of matter with no gaps like what the masses of the universe were before, a unified singularity.

14

New Theories / Re: Gravity as a unity force

« on: 07/04/2023 14:46:13 »

    I'd like to reformulate that question:

@Yahya A.Sharif ,   what would you like to hear?    Seriously, what kind of reply do you want?  Do you not want any reply but just a chance to write your ideas down?

Best Wishes.

What do you think of this?
Suppose there is a spherical mass that has 1 m³ of volume. Now think of space-time that exists around this ball and is fractured where the mass exists" space-time does not exist where the mass exists" How this fractured space-time can represent a constant space-time of (x,y,z,t) which should always exist? If the mass exists then space-time has to not exist where the mass exists. Also from another point of view if a mass curves space-time then it has to replace it where it exists whatever the nature of this space-time is.  So indeed the mass replaces space-time and fractures its geometry. It is just mass where the mass exists and vacuum around the mass. A mass fills this emptiness " vacuum" as I suggest.

15

New Theories / Re: Gravity as a unity force

« on: 06/04/2023 23:07:39 »

Gravity as a unity force

I don't recognise "unity" as a scientific term, apart from the mathematical concept of "1"
- Although you could say (in common language) that gravity is the unifying force that holds the Solar System together...
- Did you mean the mathematical concept of a unitary matrix which is also used in physics?

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

Masses tend to unify in a single whole matter, if two masses are apart they are attracted so that they touch each other and stops to be one whole mass. In the universe there are gaps between all kinds of masses, stars, planets, galaxies, etc. Think of the whole universe as just one block of matter consists of all the masses of the universe. When the universe was a singularity before the big bang, the singularity  contained the universe mass with no gaps because the singularity was a point. An action of energy converting to rest mass broke the singularity and caused a bang because mass needs non-zero volume and the singularity is a point. In black holes the process is reversed the rest mass of the star converts to energy to form a singularity. Because all the universe energy was condensed in a single point, when the universe banged, all the universe masses which were contained in the singularity before, still tend to unify with gravity, towards the unified point which existed before or the singularity. A unified singularity means it is with no gaps of space between the masses it contained, it is a point. The universe is not unified, it has gaps between its masses, the masses are attracted and stop with gravity to be one whole matter. The universe still tends to this unification because it was before a unified singularity.

16

New Theories / Re: Gravity as a unity force

« on: 06/04/2023 20:54:24 »

When all mass is converted

This will not happen.

What will stop the nuclear fusion?

it forms a black hole

How could that happen with all the mass gone?

The energy exists

Now if the whole black hole converted to mass and exploded with a bang it will form the sun again.

That breaks the conservation laws.

E=mc² does not break the law of conservation of energy.

I know science can be difficult but it is also very rewarding if you actually learn about it.
You should try.
This is a good place to start.

https://www.khanacademy.org/

Stop replying to people you think they do not know physics.

17

New Theories / Re: Gravity as a unity force

« on: 06/04/2023 20:34:27 »

The sun in its nuclear fusion converts its mass to energy. When all mass is converted and the sun dies, it forms a black hole, Which is also a singularity, now this singularity is intense energy in a single point it is not rest mass because the sun was a rest mass and all the rest mass converted to energy through the nuclear fusion and died. The universe was just a black hole.

In this black hole in a reverse conversion of the nuclear fusion" energy to mass" some of the energy converts to rest mass, the black hole will explode and give a bang" the same original post idea" Now if the whole black hole converted to mass and exploded with a bang it will form the sun again.

18

New Theories / Re: Gravity as a union force

« on: 06/04/2023 16:21:17 »

That is as well defined as "North of the North pole.".
The rest of your post is word salad.

Because you do not agree that does not mean this is not true

19

New Theories / Gravity as a unity force

« on: 06/04/2023 13:54:00 »

Space-time can not be proved in the absence of mass or motion space-time does not exist, it is just vacuum or emptiness which can be defined as non-mass , it has dimensions but this is only geometry and there is not anything whatsoever to be curved, there is actually nothing to be curved there is not evidence of the existence of the space-time in the absence of mass and motion, so it is an imaginary concept to prove gravity and motion in the universe.

The definition of non-mass "vacuum" and mass:
If a mass m exists at a point A and moves to a point B, if we want to define its motion then we can say the mass existed at point A but it moved and changed its position to point B, in other words the point A became empty or non-mass and point B is not vacuum point it is a mass point.

Gravity is a unity force, all masses in the universe tends to unite and fill this non-mass or emptiness in vacuum.

Before the big bang everything in the universe whatsoever was a unity, a singularity, what happens actually or what really made the big bang is some of the energy in the singularity point transformed into rest mass and caused the explosion. Why energy-mass transformation caused the explosion? because energy can be concentrated in a singularity point but rest mass needs a non-zero volume. There is not a zero-volume mass. So a non-zero mass volume will break the singularity and cause the explosion.

Mass and energy are interchangeable but the original form is energy not rest mass which was concentrated in the singularity and we know energy can be concentrated  in smaller volumes infinitely.

The universe was a unity, a singularity, when it exploded it still has this unity characteristics in form of gravity.

20

New Theories / Re: The two-blade hacksaw

« on: 04/04/2023 10:39:32 »

But saws for metal usually cut in one direction only, with continuous fine teeth. If you've ever used a hacksaw with a missing tooth, you'd know why!

The blades for a hacksaw are removable and can be set to cut in one direction or opposite directions.