Re: new formulations

Space/Science » in reply to new formulations

R.L. — 1/17/2003 7:04:32 PM (archived)

Your advisor is wrong, mass and energy are equivalent......

The kinetic energy gained adds to the "mass" of the object, thus it takes more energy to accelerate it further...

I have not heard that the concept is "falling out of favor"

The whole thread (15 posts)

Speed of light? - Raoul - 1/17/2003 8:05:02 PM
- Re: I've never fallen that fast . . . ;^) (n/t) (n/t) - D. Spires - 1/17/2003 8:41:23 PM
  - But it you fell from an infinitly high location towards the an infinitly strong gravity well.. - Scott - 1/17/2003 8:53:18 PM
    - Don't forget relativistic effects - Larry J - 1/17/2003 9:20:15 AM
      - Re: Don't forget relativistic effects - Nick Hoffman - 1/17/2003 6:23:09 PM
        
        Re: Hi, Nick. Still battling out what happens once the event-horizon is crossed, though . . . - D. Spires - 1/18/2003 8:46:33 PM
        
        Event horizon - Nick Hoffman - 1/18/2003 12:53:29 PM
      - new formulations - ectoterrestrial - 1/17/2003 1:37:18 PM
        
        Re: new formulations - R.L. - 1/17/2003 7:04:32 PM
      - Re: In other words...... - Johannes - 1/17/2003 1:18:27 PM
        
        nope - R.L. - 1/17/2003 7:16:19 PM
        
        Re: nope - Marcia - 1/18/2003 11:40:28 AM
        
        Nyet. - et - 1/17/2003 1:45:00 PM
        
        Re: Nyet. I would say Kyllä (?) - Johannes - 1/17/2003 6:11:48 PM
        
        Re: Nyet. I would say Kyllä (?) - et - 1/19/2003 2:22:42 PM

Recent posts

On this day in Space/Science

The whole thread (15 posts)