• Acceleration.

    From kinak@21:1/5 to All on Tue Apr 15 21:32:42 2025
    'Acceleration' might mean 'circular motion'

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From kinak@21:1/5 to Ross Finlayson on Fri Apr 18 12:35:59 2025
    Ross Finlayson wrote:
    On 04/15/2025 01:32 PM, kinak wrote:

    'Acceleration' might mean 'circular motion'

    Well, the world is turning, and Archimedes and his lever
    always must have a place to stand, so one may aver that
    dynamics of any sort is always, "un-linear", and that only
    in the abstract mental geometry is the, "linear",
    that it may always be, "un-linear".

    Einstein in one of his last books writes another derivation
    of the mass-energy equivalency about the "centrally symmetric".
    It's sort of called "Einstein's bridge", and what it does is
    make it so that the dynamics is always, "un-linear", in the
    abstract mental geometry of the, "linear".

    Most people don't know it mostly since they're not taught it.
    Yet, it's there.

    --------------------------------

    Why does the universe swirl.



    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From bertitaylor@21:1/5 to Ross Finlayson on Fri Apr 18 14:00:36 2025
    On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 16:19:00 +0000, Ross Finlayson wrote:

    On 04/15/2025 01:32 PM, kinak wrote:

    'Acceleration' might mean 'circular motion'

    There is such a thing called angular acceleration.

    Well, the world is turning, and Archimedes and his lever
    always must have a place to stand, so one may aver that
    dynamics of any sort is always, "un-linear", and that only
    in the abstract mental geometry is the, "linear",
    that it may always be, "un-linear".

    Linear means going in a line, and there is such a thing as accelerating
    along a line, where a line is defined in this sense is defined as the
    shortest distance between two points.

    Einstein in one of his last books writes another derivation
    of the mass-energy equivalency about the "centrally symmetric".

    Bullshit alert.

    It's sort of called "Einstein's bridge", and what it does is
    make it so that the dynamics is always, "un-linear", in the
    abstract mental geometry of the, "linear".

    Bullshit++.
    The fact of the Earth being circular does not rule out linearity, but
    the e=mcc frauds make much of it.

    Most people don't know it mostly since they're not taught it.
    Yet, it's there.

    Frauds rule these days.

    Woof woof

    Bertietaylor

    --

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From kinak@21:1/5 to Ross Finlayson on Fri Apr 18 19:52:31 2025
    Ross Finlayson wrote:
    On 04/18/2025 04:35 AM, kinak wrote:
    Ross Finlayson wrote:
    On 04/15/2025 01:32 PM, kinak wrote:

    'Acceleration' might mean 'circular motion'

    Well, the world is turning, and Archimedes and his lever
    always must have a place to stand, so one may aver that
    dynamics of any sort is always, "un-linear", and that only
    in the abstract mental geometry is the, "linear",
    that it may always be, "un-linear".

    Einstein in one of his last books writes another derivation
    of the mass-energy equivalency about the "centrally symmetric".
    It's sort of called "Einstein's bridge", and what it does is
    make it so that the dynamics is always, "un-linear", in the
    abstract mental geometry of the, "linear".

    Most people don't know it mostly since they're not taught it.
    Yet, it's there.

    --------------------------------

    Why does the universe swirl.



    Why does it change at all?

    A usual idea of chance is dice-rolling,
    then the idea that there is chance at all
    may be called something like "root probabilistic flaw",
    that probabilities are random at all, while
    only in the very least infinitesimal amount,
    allowing change at all, while state at all, and laws at all.


    Then, "swirl" involves the vorticial and the spiral,
    and the "wash" of things, about flow and flux.

    The idea is that spirals go out while vortices go in.

    Then, something like the sigmoid and double-spiral,
    reflect two centers connecting, yet, un-linearly.


    So, everyone knows Zeno's thought experiments.  Then,
    those usually start with it's given that there's a
    beginning, then velocity, then an end, the arrow simply
    starts with an unstoppable force resulting a finite velocity,
    and ends with an immovable object resulting a zero velocity.
    Yet, that start must start and its start must start,
    and its end must end and its end must end, "ad infinitum",
    to infinity.

    Then, these are the "infinitely-many higher orders of acceleration",
    as they get higher they get smaller yet it results infinitely many, infinitesimally small, all the time.


    Then, any one these things is an exchange, from any common
    center or contact, so it's always somehow rotational with
    respect to the rotating frame that it's in, even when it's
    simply stored and linearly symmetrical like reaction mass
    from a rocket, it's always also in the centrally symmetrical.



    Then, something like "vortices" you can find in DesCartes
    and Kelvin, while, something like "spirals" is pre-historic
    and associated with both Anantha and Thoth, as "the symbol"
    of mathematics, then that attenuation and dissipation, and
    oscillation and restitution, result any double-sigmoid, "swirl".


    Also relevant is turbulence and the turbid and "wash",
    what all non-linear in kinematics, is barely modeled
    in a partial account in the linear in kinetics.



    Maybe something like Kinnear's "The Great Wheel: Zero the Un-Naming"
    you'd enjoy.

    ==============================

    In drawing a circle, there is acceleration at every point along its circumference.





    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bertitaylor@21:1/5 to All on Fri Apr 18 21:27:58 2025
    XPost: sci.physics

    Wow you guys are so thoroughly wrongly educated about the fundamentals
    of physics.

    Your schooling must have been terrible.

    Woof-woof woof woof-woof woof

    Bertietaylor

    --

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jim Pennino@21:1/5 to Bertitaylor on Fri Apr 18 16:44:56 2025
    XPost: sci.physics

    In sci.physics Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
    Wow you guys are so thoroughly wrongly educated about the fundamentals
    of physics.

    Acceleration is the first derivative of velocity with respect to time
    and velocity is the first derivative of position with respect to time.

    Trivial.


    Your schooling must have been terrible.

    Your schooling is obviously nonexistent, Arindam.


    Woof-woof woof woof-woof woof

    Bertietaylor

    Arindam's other personality.


    --

    --
    penninojim@yahoo.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)