0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: Kryptid on 28/01/2023 20:34:51A vaporized metal is still a gas. If we have that gas in a container, will it lose all of its weight?No, because gas atoms can hold a finite number of heat particles and heat particles repel each other and will escape the container.
A vaporized metal is still a gas. If we have that gas in a container, will it lose all of its weight?
Quote from: Yaniv on 28/01/2023 20:59:02Quote from: Kryptid on 28/01/2023 20:34:51A vaporized metal is still a gas. If we have that gas in a container, will it lose all of its weight?No, because gas atoms can hold a finite number of heat particles and heat particles repel each other and will escape the container.Given that gases can reach millions or billions of degrees in the cores of stars and supernova, that sample of gas with merely 200,000 times the energy of the original metal is nowhere remotely close to the limit of how much heat a gas can hold.
Quote from: Kryptid on 28/01/2023 22:00:22Quote from: Yaniv on 28/01/2023 20:59:02Quote from: Kryptid on 28/01/2023 20:34:51A vaporized metal is still a gas. If we have that gas in a container, will it lose all of its weight?No, because gas atoms can hold a finite number of heat particles and heat particles repel each other and will escape the container.Given that gases can reach millions or billions of degrees in the cores of stars and supernova, that sample of gas with merely 200,000 times the energy of the original metal is nowhere remotely close to the limit of how much heat a gas can hold.W reduction at increasing T in vacuum disproves F=ma and discards your astrophysical calculations.
No. The future of earthly matters has not been determined yet. The results of the experiment could provide the keys to the temple.
W reduction at increasing T in vacuum disproves F=ma and discards your astrophysical calculations.
By the way, weight reducing with temperature would not disprove F=ma.
Explain ?
Quote from: Yaniv on 29/01/2023 02:29:00Explain ?All that means is that a hot object weighs less and thus the gravitational force acting on it is less than it would be before. That doesn't make F=ma wrong.
Quote from: Kryptid on 29/01/2023 02:33:53Quote from: Yaniv on 29/01/2023 02:29:00Explain ?All that means is that a hot object weighs less and thus the gravitational force acting on it is less than it would be before. That doesn't make F=ma wrong.But we agree hot and cold objects fall at the same rate. Don't we ?
Quote from: Yaniv on 29/01/2023 02:45:53Quote from: Kryptid on 29/01/2023 02:33:53Quote from: Yaniv on 29/01/2023 02:29:00Explain ?All that means is that a hot object weighs less and thus the gravitational force acting on it is less than it would be before. That doesn't make F=ma wrong.But we agree hot and cold objects fall at the same rate. Don't we ?If there was a mass loss equal to the weight loss in the hot object, then both the hot object and the cold object would still fall at the same rate.So measuring a loss of weight with an increase in temperature would not be a sufficient test to demonstrate the accuracy of your model.
W reduction at increasing T should be sufficient to demonstrate the inaccuracy of W=mg ? or not ?
If there was a mass loss equal to the weight loss in the hot object, then both the hot object and the cold object would still fall at the same rate.
Quote from: Yaniv on 29/01/2023 03:17:30W reduction at increasing T should be sufficient to demonstrate the inaccuracy of W=mg ? or not ?It wouldn't, because:Quote from: Kryptid on 29/01/2023 02:52:53If there was a mass loss equal to the weight loss in the hot object, then both the hot object and the cold object would still fall at the same rate.
Are you now suggesting m (mass) is not the conserved quantity ?
Are you now suggesting m (mass) is not the conserved quantity ?No. Mass can still be conserved if it is going somewhere else.
Going somewhere else out of the equation or out of our universe ?
Quote from: Yaniv on 29/01/2023 04:19:51Going somewhere else out of the equation or out of our universe ?Somewhere else within the same Universe (presumably). That would depend upon the specifics of the hypothesis.
Into higher dimensions than three ?
Quote from: Yaniv on 29/01/2023 04:39:05Into higher dimensions than three ?Unlikely, but then again, that depends on the hypothesis. I am not citing any specific hypothesis. Anyone can speculate on any number of places the mass goes. The exact location is irrelevant. The point of this thought exercise is to demonstrate that a loss of weight with increasing temperature can be perfectly consistent with F=ma.