[geocentrism] Re: Geostatsats
- From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 08:52:04 +1000
Further to that, more confusion. I have always been mystified by these laws of
inertia. or acceleration. acceleration= change in velocity or direction.
to accelerate a body is to apply a force yes, and if that is the a change in
velocity, then this force does work. energy is expended.. (curious can it be
expended? not created nor destroyed,) anyway, to continue.. but if this
force causes a change of direction, ie cause a satellite to rotate around the
earth, (centrepetal force) no work is done , no energy is expended, .. ditto a
bearingless flywheel in a vacuum..it will spin forever at constant velocity and
claimed to be accelerating. .
So the mystery is why are these two actions, (a) a change in velocity
representing work done, and (b) a change in direction does not mean work
necessarily done.. why are thes actions considered as the same and called
acceleration?
Thats what makes me rebel against MS. They ignore all the too hard
philosophical questions, and charge on regardless. They tested the first bomb,
knowing the inherent theoretical danger of a chain reaction.
They claim the law of the conservation of Energy, which cannot be created or
destroyed, and evolution which claims to come from nothing to eventually reach
a higher evolved state, and entropy (is a measure of the unavailability of a
system's energy to do work) which says all activity will cease and come to a
stop.. a series of obvious contradictions is all I see here.
Phil.
fromwiki, Notice that detestable manouvre of increasing negativity where I
underlined it, as though it were a positive thing ... .
We have previously mentioned that a finite universe may be considered an
isolated system. As such, it may be subject to the Second Law of
Thermodynamics, so that its total entropy is constantly increasing. It has been
speculated that the universe is fated to a heat death in which all the energy
ends up as a homogeneous distribution of thermal energy, so that no more work
can be extracted from any source. (is that evolution or devolution?)
Entropy change has often been defined as a change to a more disordered state at
a molecular level. or,
Entropy - energy broken down in irretrievable heat.[19] or
a.. Boltzmann's constant times the logarithm of a multiplicity; where the
multiplicity of a macrostate is the number of microstates that correspond to
the macrostate.[20]
a.. the number of ways of arranging things in a system (times the Boltzmann's
constant).[21]
a.. a non-conserved thermodynamic state function, measured in terms of the
number of microstates a system can assume, which corresponds to a degradation
in usable energy.[22]
a.. a direct measure of the randomness of a system.[23]
a.. a measure of energy dispersal at a specific temperature.[24]
a.. a measure of the partial loss of the ability of a system to perform work
due to the effects of irreversibility.[25]
a.. an index of the tendency of a system towards spontaneous change.[26]
a.. a measure of the unavailability of a system's energy to do work; also a
measure of disorder; the higher the entropy the greater the disorder.[27]
a.. a parameter representing the state of disorder of a system at the atomic,
ionic, or molecular level.[28]
a.. a measure of disorder in the universe or of the availability of the energy
in a system to do work.[29]
Other related posts:
