XPost: alt.sci.physics, uk.politics.misc, sci.physics
On 23 47, Dave wrote:
Maths is important for physics. The nature of number shows that
E=0.5mv^2 for kinetic energy can't be true, because arbitrarily changing
the definition of length (human) changes the innate energy. Square 8,
get 64. Square 0.8, get 0.64. Think about it.
This is regarding inflection points in increasing the velocity above and decreasing the value below 1. In fact it's all nonsense even with m/s,
the energy falls faster as a percentage because of the definition using
v^2.
I'm not interested in a consistent SI model over the real world. Save
the models for computer games, and move physics to the arts faculty.
Meanwhile the real physicists will be reinterpreting relativity and
getting something useful built.
Sorry, after thinking about this more, this particular argument has no validity. Need to get out and check on an airtrack, not the sums. The E=0.5mv^2 generally accepted claim is self consistent in maths, except
for the rocket sled thought experiment. (add same energy from different starting velocities.)
Need two concrete pieces of evidence to make a cast iron case.
1- air track
2- free fall drop measurement to check is gravity is m/s^2, or m/s per
meter of descent. (needs to be 10's of meters).
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)