Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 21:10:49 +0000
Subject: Re: Acceleration's higher orders
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.math
References: <AricndPpR933M3f4nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <ushsos$2caer$1@dont-email.me>
 <614f2594d8febab66c1ce843a1559e1d@www.novabbs.com>
 <usihag$2ncqu$1@paganini.bofh.team>
 <rxWdnb7u9IPWY3H4nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <usjoci$2u0je$1@paganini.bofh.team>
 <_tWdnSyYfPRNenD4nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <xtCdnfSJ0sJfp3L4nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <ddqcnfccVfNb2HL4nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:10:53 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <ddqcnfccVfNb2HL4nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <NsScnQOz7spEzWb4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 268
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-9aqbx5wDmJkem8li76CPPoTSIJh+2iIn4pXO+dFa/OunCCXSIO7Pn/7Ked7B5ZsKRCDx28viXRpTq22!UJEpW7FOoRGRvuUS/2buz3ZE2j2G/iI2ipcsf3lkU1QO8btrUxHrLwhO+kQENfHDbaIFepnUp+oS
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 12876

On 03/11/2024 10:56 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> On 03/11/2024 10:09 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
>> On 03/10/2024 10:03 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
>>> On 03/09/2024 11:44 PM, Ismael Balazowsky Homutov wrote:
>>>> Ross Finlayson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 03/09/2024 12:37 PM, Ramiro Juárez wrote:
>>>>>> gharnagel wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Volney wrote:
>>>>>>>> For what it's worth, some higher derivatives have (somewhat
>>>>>>>> whimsical)
>>>>>>>> names. The derivative of acceleration with respect to time is
>>>>>>>> called
>>>>>>>> jerk, the derivative of jerk is called snap or jounce, the
>>>>>>>> derivative
>>>>>>>> of snap is crackle, the derivative of crackle is pop. Someone was a
>>>>>>>> breakfast cereal fan. The highest derivative I know of that's
>>>>>>>> actually used is snap, when designing the transition of roads or
>>>>>>>> railroads from straight to a curve they try to minimize the
>>>>>>>> 'snap' of
>>>>>>>> a vehicle following the transition segment.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd heard of jerk.  Many years ago, Norman Dean "invented" the Dean
>>>>>>> drive, a system of rotating masses with the center of rotation of
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> masses being moved at particular times in the rotation cycle.  He
>>>>>>> showed that the weight of the assembly was decreased when running
>>>>>>> - on
>>>>>>> a bathroom scales.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> my friend, heard?? It's enough to push body on a line with a
>>>>>> forcemeter
>>>>>> on it. You get the slope for the jerk since the acceleration is not
>>>>>> constant.
>>>>>> Ohh my, heard of. And you want to speed higher than light, do you.
>>>>>> Are
>>>>>> we from amrica??
>>>>>
>>>>> What you get is that scales, measure deflection, in the system, while
>>>>> balances, measure not deflection, according to references.
>>>>> Physics is an open and closed system.
>>>>
>>>> whatever you say it's completely nonsense. Pushing an object on a line,
>>>> and bouncing back repeatedly, makes acceleration NOT constant, me
>>>> friendo.
>>>> Plotting the data shows the jerk directly and no debate. You
>>>> relativists
>>>> around here, beyond arduino, have no laboratory experience
>>>> whatsoever in
>>>> physics. All you know is Einstine, a lower than mediocre highschool
>>>> student.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hey now, we're talking about f = ma, and about the infinitely-many
>>> higher-order derivatives of velocity, and meters/second and
>>> seconds/meter, that it is possible to have constant velocity,
>>> constant rest for that matter, constant acceleration and so on,
>>> but to get there it goes from zero to one, each higher order
>>> contribution going from 0 to 1 and back to 0 again, with regards
>>> to acceleration and deceleration, starting and stopping, and
>>> parting and meeting, all the objects in their ephemerides each
>>> other, in a world where all the orbits add up to the geodesy's
>>> world-lines, according to a theory of sum potentials, where
>>> all the real fields are potential fields including the classical
>>> field their sum in the middle, with least action and conservation,
>>> then about Einstein's bridge and rotational space-contraction,
>>> because Einstein's theory is classical in the limit.
>>>
>>> Usually the unit impulse function, and, the radial basis function,
>>> are two analytical features, of interest. For example, the
>>> Dirac delta, also known as unit impulse, is not-a-real-function,
>>> that's modeled as a continuum limit of real functions, that
>>> always has area 1, but is a spike of infinite height and infinitesimal
>>> width at the origin. The radial basis function, is a round bump
>>> on the line, with area 1, say. A droplet, is like a sphere,
>>> yet it's pointed in a direction, which is the direction of
>>> the classical force vector, in the theory of waves.
>>>
>>>
>>> So, here we're talking about the infinitely-many higher-order
>>> derivatives of velocity, calling those "v^prime(infinity)".
>>>
>>> Correspondingly there's about "e^x + e^-x", and also the
>>> power series out both sides of that, and, the sinusoidal,
>>> with respect to, the inch-worm.
>>>
>>> Einstein knows Newton, and, Newton doesn't define what
>>> happens except "rests stays at (constant) rest, motion
>>> stays at (constant) motion, all interactions follow a
>>> billiard ball model of perfect inelastic collisions",
>>> yet things don't and they aren't. It's undefined.
>>> So, Einstein, helps recognize, that there are some
>>> sorts these "Newton's Zero-eth laws of motion".
>>>
>>>
>>> I studied this for a while the other day and the
>>> usual gimme-gimme-gratification or cursory search
>>> arrives pretty much at "well, you see, it's undefined ...".
>>>
>>> Yet, life goes on.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I got to wondering about this and well it basically gets
>> to Galileo and the great relation of constant acceleration,
>> usually enough in the terrestrial setting the only source
>> of which being gravity, which is really only "constant"
>> in relatively short distances like from the table to the
>> floor, vis-a-vis "high-altitude low-opening parachuting"
>> or "a hole to the center of the Earth", it's sort of so
>> that the usual framing of terrestrial gravity as constant
>> acceleration is contrived, and, Newtonian gravity pretty
>> much works when the objects are quite massive and independent,
>> yet, quite far apart, when they see each other as curves,
>> or walls, instead of points, for objects with about equal
>> masses, vis-a-vis objects with inequal masses, vis-a-vis
>> their orbits, and their kinematics as systems together.
>>
>> "Physics is open and closed, and it's open."
>>
>>
>> Mathematically of course for v = dp/dt and a = dv/dt = v'
>> and all the infinitely-many higher orders of acceleration,
>> and deceleration, is about sum-of-potentials, and it's
>> about rest-exchange momentum, about why "physics is open
>> so momentum is in part virtual or pseudo with regards
>> to released potential".
>>
>> It's like, a Mexican jumping bean, is actually a sort
>> of chrysalis, and inside is a wound-up spring, and it
>> wants out. Physics is an open system, ....
>>
>>
>> So anyways, Galilean invariance, is about the greatest
>> thing, in terms of that "force is fictitious", that
>> what that really means is "our classical force model,
>> where the classical force is real, is actually the
>> sum result of all... the potentials, which are actually
>> the real, that it results that classical force, is really
>> just the first or last fictitious force, being the
>> impulse of a singularity in potential theory, which
>> is to explain why Galilean invariance holds, at each
>> instant, while in each instant, also continuously apply
>> all... the dynamics, in a continuum mechanics."
>>
>>
>> Thus, concepts here involve:
>>
>> v-prime-infty: the series of the infinitely-many orders of acceleration,
>> which are non-zero, yet mostly vanishing,
>> that in the classical limit, results Galileo and Newton
>> and Einstein's laws of rest and motion.
>>
>> classical limit:
>> classically there is one of superclassical theories,
>> superclassically the classical is the limit instead.
>>
>> fictitious force:
>> defined as that classical force is truncated from a
>> moment to a scalar, anything else, while in the theory
>> of sum potentials, it's exactly that, and results real force.
>>
>>
>> So, looking for a theory where gravity is a force,
>> and, forces are real, and, of course it's a field
>> theory and a gauge theory, space-time is a continuous
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========