Ron Hitler Barrassi wrote:
> 
> 
> necoandjeff wrote:
> 
>> Ron Hitler Barrassi wrote:
>>
>>> necoandjeff wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ron Hitler Barrassi wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> Nice try but I didn't say "200kg of mass".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, but it would have been better if you did.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No. It's 200kg of force not mass. This force comes from
>>>>> accleration. Newton's First?  F=ma.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hey Brett. Even Kevin's little poodle understands that you have
>>>> consistently been talking about mass as if it were a force. Mass is
>>>> measured in kilograms buddy., acceleration is measured in meters per
>>>> second squared, and force is measured in Newtons (not,
>>>> unfortunately, Einsteins, though we may understand if you were
>>>> confused by this.) A Newton is, surprisingly enough, equal to the
>>>> force required to accelerate 1 kilogram, one meter per second
>>>> squared, as suggested by F=ma. It's good of you to throw out that
>>>> equation 3 or 4 times in the same thread, but you might want to take
>>>> the time to understand it first. Arf, arf!!
>>>>
>>>
>>> g=1
>>
>>
>>
>> That was a beautiful butsurigaku non-sequitor, Brett. 
> 
> 
> It's not a non-sequitor if you understand what g is. And know it's value.

Yes. For some reason, you think g=1. I have no idea what you think g is, 
though.

> It's also not a non-sequitor if you know that multiplication by a 
> constant is.
> 
> It's not a non-sequitor if you know that force is often expressed in 
> kilograms (or tonnes). More accurately, kilogram-force or kilopond but 
> more commonly just kilogram. If it's good enough for Dassault Mirage, 
> it's good enough for me.
> http://www.sengpielaudio.com/ConvForce.htm
> 
> It's not a non-sequitor if you know that multiplying a scalar by a 
> vector gives you a vector.
> "You are pressing down with 100kg". "Down" is a vector.

"Down" has no magnitude therefore "down" is not a vector.

> It's only a non-sequitor if you want to distract from the fact that 5yen 
> is inventing magical vectors to satisfy a highschool level 
> mis-understanding of classical physics. Much like your highschool 
> mis-understanding of fluid dynamics.
> 
> It doesn't matter in this example anyway because mass *is* force. 

No, mass is not force.

> Gravity is the property of mass and can be defined completely without 
> any other reference. The acceleration of gravity is also completely 
> irrelevant. The force exterted between our 100kg 5yen and earth is 
> derived by this formula
> F=6.67x10^-11 * m1 * m2 / r^2
> where m1=100,000 and m2 is the mass of the earth (in grams), r is 
> distance. As you can see chairs have nothing to do with it.

Actually, in that equation, the masses for "m" are in kilograms. I'll 
show you how it works.

Remember when I said that gravity's pulls with a force of 980 newtons on 
a person with a mass of 100 kg?

F = (6.67e-11)(100)(5.97e24)/(6.38e6)^2

F = 3.982e16/4.07e13

F= 978.38 newtons

> (That is Newton by the way)
> 
> Gowen's poodle is nearly as dumb as him. I've forgotten, are you a 
> lawyer too? You are too boring for details like this to sink in.

Didn't they have "Mr. Wizard's World" when you were a kid?

- Kevin