Mass is neither an intrinsic property, or an element
[Only registered users see links. ] wrote:
No, I think Don was serious when he wrote:
MessageID: <1130765806.724465.215760@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups .com>
 No, it would be [(vtvt)=s/t=ft: Written more precisely as ft^2/s;
 which makes it equal to 2w/g; which is the mass of the body with a
 weight of w.
More errors in one paragraph than you can shake a stick at...
OK, me bad. I should have mentioned: for x,y <>0. However, even with
this restrictions, Don still believes  though he's been told otherwise
untold times  this equation to be invalid:
MessageID: <1124910421.572468.194460@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups .com>
> The question is this: If you have a unit of the form
> 1 X/(Y/Z) is this the same as 1 X*Z/Y?

> The answer is yes, no matter what X, Y and Z are.

NOT if either X, Y, or Z is a ratio.
Some other instances where Don showed his outstanding commandment of
7th grade physics:
Date Don Correct
04/11 m=w/(g/2) m=w/g
04/11 ft=s/t Ft=m*s/t
31/10 2w/g ... is the mass m=w/g
31/10 [(vtvt)=s/t=ft v(t)v(i)=s/t=Ft/m
04/10 ft^2/s=w/g Ft^2/2s=w/g
23/09 (vtvi)/t^2=32'/sec^2 (vtvi)/t=32'/sec^2
08/09 s=(g/2)t s=(g/2)t^2
05/09 (vtvi)/t=2s/t^2=g/2 (vtvi)/t=2s/t^2=g
27/08 ft/(vtvi)=ft^2/s ft/(vtvi)=ft^2/2s
23/08 a/216'/sec^2 g/2=16ft/sec^2
23/08 a(vtvi)/t a=(vtvi)/t
12/06 g=(vtvi)/t^2 g=(vtvi)/t
12/06 (m)=ft/s/t m=Ft^2/2s
07/06 (m)=wa/fg m=F/a or m=w/g
28/05 1 slug = 32 ft sec^2/32 ft 1 slug = 32 lbf sec^2/32 ft
27/05 s=2(vtvi)/t s=1/2(vtvi)*t
21/05 1 slug = 1 lbf s^2/foot; _Not_ 1 slug = 1 lbf / (1 ft/s^2)
Don didn't even realize both equations are the same.
Personally, I believe Don is beyond any hope and lives in his own
little (and nonfunctional) world of physics. He won't stop posting,
so all you can do is mock him...
Mass is neither an intrinsic property, or an element
In <1131433798.555984.40430@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups. com>, on
11/08/2005
at 12:02 AM, [Only registered users see links. ] said:
No; the first is meaningless WRT the reals and the second is 0. Now,
if you extend the reals then the answer will depend on just how you
extend them.
As an example, there is an extension of the reals called the twopoint
compactification. Think of it as the reals augmented by +oo and oo.
Now, if you want to extend the arithmetic operations you immediately
run into the question of whether you want 1/0 to be +oo or oo. Pretty
much any extension of the arithmetic operations is going to violate
rules that you are used to relying on.

Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>
Unsolicited bulk Email subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive Email. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to [Only registered users see links. ]
Mass is neither an intrinsic property, or an element
Clemens W wrote:
SNIP<
Here my friends is where the whole house of cards falls: According to
"dimensional analysis", we must be able to cancel the superfluous
units. It can be done with 1 slug = 1 lbf s^2/foot; but not with 1
slug = 1 lbf / (1 ft/s^2).