0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

I think that I previously suggested that ground level potential energy for any mass would be mg.

So you are now suggesting that time is temperature-dependent? Quote I think that I previously suggested that ground level potential energy for any mass would be mg. Dimensions?

Then there is no point in continuing the discusson.

Quote from: alancalverd on 26/07/2016 16:53:15Then there is no point in continuing the discusson.Let me rephrase:The dimensions are m and g and h.It really doesn't matter what m is unless you are going to actually make a calculation of a process, in which case this would require figuring out what the relevant m of that process is. It is that the proportionality of any and all m at h upholds the equivalence principle that is of relevance. Unless you are referring to any other dimensions, in which case I don't know what you mean.

I don't know what you mean by dimensions, sorry.

QuoteI don't know what you mean by dimensions, sorry.Then there is no point whatever in continuing the discussion. I might as well be writing in Martian heiroglyphics.

You have previously described dimensions as apples and oranges and pears Alan.

Quote from: timey on 27/07/2016 14:53:40You have previously described dimensions as apples and oranges and pears Alan.Alan is making the case for Dimensional balance timey. It would be good for you to investigate "Dimensional Analysis" at Wikipedia. His point is; You can't multiply, or divide apples by oranges. All equations must be dimensionally balanced.

Quote from: Ethos_ on 27/07/2016 15:04:56Quote from: timey on 27/07/2016 14:53:40You have previously described dimensions as apples and oranges and pears Alan.Alan is making the case for Dimensional balance timey. It would be good for you to investigate "Dimensional Analysis" at Wikipedia. His point is; You can't multiply, or divide apples by oranges. All equations must be dimensionally balanced.For goodness sake Ethos...mgh is a known calculation!Without h, mg can describe gravity potential for individual masses at ground level and the further multiplying by h adds gravity potential energy for those masses at elevation. h being the height of elevation.The dimensions of this suggestion are exactly proportional to the equivalence principle, in that all relationships that exist retain their existing proportionality between each other at elevation.I'm very sorry that I cannot express this in terms of dimensional analysis! Perhaps this is a job for someone who is adept at mathematics - and fact is, talking to someone who is adept at mathematics is indeed the very reason for my posting on this forum...

Quote from: timey on 27/07/2016 16:32:37Quote from: Ethos_ on 27/07/2016 15:04:56Quote from: timey on 27/07/2016 14:53:40You have previously described dimensions as apples and oranges and pears Alan.Alan is making the case for Dimensional balance timey. It would be good for you to investigate "Dimensional Analysis" at Wikipedia. His point is; You can't multiply, or divide apples by oranges. All equations must be dimensionally balanced.For goodness sake Ethos...mgh is a known calculation!Without h, mg can describe gravity potential for individual masses at ground level and the further multiplying by h adds gravity potential energy for those masses at elevation. h being the height of elevation.The dimensions of this suggestion are exactly proportional to the equivalence principle, in that all relationships that exist retain their existing proportionality between each other at elevation.I'm very sorry that I cannot express this in terms of dimensional analysis! Perhaps this is a job for someone who is adept at mathematics - and fact is, talking to someone who is adept at mathematics is indeed the very reason for my posting on this forum...Wrong! The h is required to produce an energy equation. This is why dimensional analysis cannot be ignored. Mg is kg m s^-2. Not correct.

Valid values for h fall within a set range. The gravitational field needs to be able to be considered uniform within this defined range. It would be meaningless to measure from the surface of the earth with a value for h in the hundreds of thousands of metres range. Since the value for g varies significantly over such a distance. Your value for energy would be in significant error. This is not a trivial point. All things are relative.

then the equivalence principle is upheld as all energy, relationships between particles, atoms, molecules, etc remain proportional to each other.

Quote from: timey on 27/07/2016 20:34:26then the equivalence principle is upheld as all energy, relationships between particles, atoms, molecules, etc remain proportional to each other.So there is no change in the emitted energy of the mossbauer photon or the frequency of an atomic clock. Face it, if the quantised energy levels of an atom were to change with gravitational potential, space would be occupied by plasma, not atoms and molecules, but it ain't.

There is no mass involved in the Fe57 transition. Nor are the masses of the electrons and nuclei relevant to the Cs133 hyperfine transition.Gravitational potential increases as you move away from the source of gravitation. V(x) = -GM/x by definition. So it is zero in deep space and tends to minus infinity as you approach a massive body.

The potential energy of any particle of mass m at height h in a uniform gravitational field is mgh.