Given that the formula states absolutey nothing about the 'speed of energy', I worry about the children in Missouri.trishtrish10 said:
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The existance of GOD
- Thread starter hadeka
- Start date
Mr Spinkles
Mr
The "show me" state may not be as full of skeptics as I imagined.
trishtrish10,
Every single statement of yours involving science makes me honestly believe that "10" refers to you age. It is all so ridiculously wrong. You have no clue whatsoever on what "energy" is, you are totally confused regarding "radiation", you contest the very well proven "mass-energy equivalence", you infer that you know what "time" really is, and I can't even laugh at your theories on "heat".
You should read a couple of very elementary books on physics. Start by trying to understand the terms in quotes above.
Every single statement of yours involving science makes me honestly believe that "10" refers to you age. It is all so ridiculously wrong. You have no clue whatsoever on what "energy" is, you are totally confused regarding "radiation", you contest the very well proven "mass-energy equivalence", you infer that you know what "time" really is, and I can't even laugh at your theories on "heat".
You should read a couple of very elementary books on physics. Start by trying to understand the terms in quotes above.
by the way i am a missouri state certified science teacher...
Your posts do not indicate that at all. And according to the article below, you should have never attained that certificate.
http://www.pittstate.edu/services/scied/Certify/secuni97.htm
Your posts do not indicate that at all. And according to the article below, you should have never attained that certificate.
http://www.pittstate.edu/services/scied/Certify/secuni97.htm
trishtrish10
Active Member
thanks for the criticism. i know that energy is mass traveling at some velocity. every form of energy has a different speed. radiation is faster than light and that's why u don't see it. sound is slower. every form of energy has a different speed. i am just questioning einsteins theories, many of which were proved by most scientists to be false. the pope should have been the greatest man in the twentieth century not Einstein. but einstien was elected by time magazine not everyone else. the pope has done and suffered much better than anyone since who knows when. like george bush, he will go down with "great" after his name. i saw a re circular rainbow around the sun.
trishtrish10
Active Member
philosophy is the study of man. theology is the study of God. i prefer to study both human nature and Divine nature. sometimes we are both illogical.
What theories? Proved to be false by whom? You haven't a clue what you're talking about.trishtrish10 said:
trish,
You wrote "i know that energy is mass traveling at some velocity". Haven't you heard of potential energy? I was taught this concept when 11 years old.
You seem again to differentiate between radiation and light. Light is radiation. I think this is obvious even to most preschoolers.
I agree completely with the comments from Deut. "What theories? Proved to be false by whom? You haven't a clue what you're talking about."
Do yourself a favour, try to understand the terms in quotes in my previous post.
Do children a favour, don't try to teach them your theories. They will just laugh at you.
You wrote "i know that energy is mass traveling at some velocity". Haven't you heard of potential energy? I was taught this concept when 11 years old.
You seem again to differentiate between radiation and light. Light is radiation. I think this is obvious even to most preschoolers.
I agree completely with the comments from Deut. "What theories? Proved to be false by whom? You haven't a clue what you're talking about."
Do yourself a favour, try to understand the terms in quotes in my previous post.
Do children a favour, don't try to teach them your theories. They will just laugh at you.
Ceridwen018
Well-Known Member
Lots and lots of problems.
--Dumb and Dumber
"So you're telling me there's a chance!"
--Dumb and Dumber
Just because you're religious doesn't mean you're moral, and just because you're an Atheist doesn't make you 'sinful'. I don't believe in god, however I feel I live a very moral and healthy life.
First of all, if I'm forcing myself to believe just to cover my own ***...that's not REAL belief. Secondly, if I'm gonna believe in god just so that I can cover all my bases, I'm going to have to believe in ALL gods. Thor, Zeus, Osiris, Allah--the works. What if one of them ends up being right and the Christian god (of whom I assume you are referring) wrong? I'll have forced myself to believe for nothing!
It's called "Pascal's Wager". It's been discussed repeatedly and at length. The "only one logicall [sic] answer" is that the wager is seriously flawed.Helios said:
You have spoken - only to dredge up tired old arguments of little value,
trishtrish10
Active Member
please refer to e=mc2 and u will see that light and radiation as well as other energies have different speeds.
Repeating myself from another thread,
"trishtrish10,
A friendly piece of advice: study some very elementary physics and stop making a total fool of yourself. Choose material suited for ten- to twelve-year-olds. That was the age span when I learned those things, and I think it much the same today. http://www.queenhill.demon.co.uk/radiation/whatis.htm has a rather good explanation of different kinds of radiation, like gamma rays, X rays, ultraviolet, light, infrared, heat rays, microwaves, radio waves..."
Light (UV, visible, IR) is radiation, and this radiation travels at the speed of light. Energy has no speed, because it is neither particles nor radiation. And you still haven't understood how the mass-energy equivalence works.
"trishtrish10,
A friendly piece of advice: study some very elementary physics and stop making a total fool of yourself. Choose material suited for ten- to twelve-year-olds. That was the age span when I learned those things, and I think it much the same today. http://www.queenhill.demon.co.uk/radiation/whatis.htm has a rather good explanation of different kinds of radiation, like gamma rays, X rays, ultraviolet, light, infrared, heat rays, microwaves, radio waves..."
Light (UV, visible, IR) is radiation, and this radiation travels at the speed of light. Energy has no speed, because it is neither particles nor radiation. And you still haven't understood how the mass-energy equivalence works.
trishtrish10
Active Member
on the contrary, the speed of gamma radiation is c2, alpha and beta radiation are slower. sound is much slower and has mass. biological energy is the slowest. heat is slower than light. all matter has potetial energy. all energy has mass. light is made up of photons which travel in waves.
Are you trying to correct the university teachings that I linked? The speed of gamma radiation is the speed of light = c, because it can be regarded as consisting of photons. c2 is something very different from speed, as it means velocity of light squared. Alpha radiation is particle radiation, and of course slower. Beta radiation consists of positrons and/or electrons, which are lighter than the helium nuclei in alpha radiation, and has a velocity beween alpha and gamma. Sound is pressure variations, travelling as waves. Pressure has no mass, and so sound hasn't.
What do you mean by biological energy? Whatever you mean, energy has no speed in itself. A good example of that is a stone on a mountain top. It it perfectly still, but it has potential energy compared to a position in the valley below.
I don't like "all energy has mass". I prefer to say that "energy is, in some ways, equvialent to mass".
By saying "light is made up of photons which travel in waves." you confuse two ways of regarding light. Light can be regarded as a stream of photons, or as a waveform. Choose one at a time.
What do you mean by biological energy? Whatever you mean, energy has no speed in itself. A good example of that is a stone on a mountain top. It it perfectly still, but it has potential energy compared to a position in the valley below.
I don't like "all energy has mass". I prefer to say that "energy is, in some ways, equvialent to mass".
By saying "light is made up of photons which travel in waves." you confuse two ways of regarding light. Light can be regarded as a stream of photons, or as a waveform. Choose one at a time.
trishtrish10
Active Member
just trying to pick ure brain and question what is new and what already exists.
Ceridwen018
Well-Known Member
Good save, trish.
trishtrish10
Active Member
e=mc2 is only one of the many energy equations soon to be formulated. there are as many energy equations as there are forms of energy. let's work together to form them, what do u say?
I say that I have tried to explain some basic physics to you, but I think I have to give it up now. Your "there are as many energy equations as there are forms of energy" is nonensical. There is only one mass-energy equivalence equation, and it is obviously already formulated. No more are needed, because energy can be transformed from one type to another one, like when the kinetic energy of an impacting bullet is transformed into mechanical energy and heat energy.
Ceridwen018
Well-Known Member
anders, I believe you...if it makes you feel any better