Recent content by Boffin

Even scientists often use the concept of absoute light speed in their conceptual explanations. For example I was simply relating the discussion of black holes from p122 from “Black Holes and Time Warps” by Kip Thorne were it says "When a corpuscle of light is lauched from such a star...it will...

Information In the book “Black Holes and Time Warps” by Kip Thorne it is mentioned on pg 121 that Einstein didn’t believe that black holes existed so the thinking that black holes can exist didn’t come directly from his writing, thoughts, or how he interpreted his relativity theories. Because...

Are you saying that black holes can't exist acccording special relativity or are you saying something else? Are Jesse Kirkham's formulas and interpretation accurate according to special relativity?

D. Real basis of the black hole formulas? 1. Messages from Naty1 and Jonathan seem to indicate that how much a massive body can be compressed is the central issue in whether black holes can exist? Do I understand the comments correctly? 2. "Black Holes and Time Warps" pg 136 Kip Thorne...

Are you saying that there is no good way of telling whether the formulaes used to calculate whether black holes exist use the right assumptions?

C. Black holes can exist whether light is a particle or wave? 1. Thanks Jonathan Scott and RandallB for your replies on this issue. Kip Thorne lead me to believe that scientists who believed in a wave model of light did not believe that black holes could exist because of the waving or crawling...

A. See my questions below. First, here is some information from the book “Black Holes and Time Warps” by Kip Thorne. So far this is the best reference book I can find on the original thinking of black holes. 1. Pg 122 Very compact stars were theorized to occur way back in 1783 by John...

Physics is all about intimidation? I'll quote from a book I looked through in my recent search for information at the university library, Collective Electrodynamics, by Carver Mead page xvii. "In those days Physics was an openly combative subject-the one who blinked first lost the argument...

I can see it's pointless to discuss issues with you Zapper. I'm in favor of using the term Helmholtz energy and you say I'm not in favor of it. Where did you pull this out of? Obviously when I say things in plain English you read it the reverse, and then twist the argument around.

I have no idea what you are arguing about. Are you arguing in favor of using plural energy names or in favor of using energy only as a concept of total energy? Please state your arguments in an understandable way.

Check out textbooks like Engineering Thermodynamics by Glen E. Myers. No Gibbs energy. It's Gibbs function. No Helmholtz energy. This concept belongs to the term Availability. Note that no energy was harmed in the making of these terms.

How about the confusion about mass on this forum? Who cares what it is, semantics, or whatever. It's an issue in physics. Sure, I can show you why there is a use for relativistic mass. How about the confusion among even people on this forum about the matter? The question about the photon's...

Sure I know there are different sides to this issue. I read the article mentioned "On the abuse and use of relativistic mass" by Gary Oas http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0504110. I don't agree with the author. He can barely think of any reasons why relativistic mass is used. I can think of many. He...

Photons do have mass, but I'm jumping in here with an answer, because none of the mentors have provided a decent one to this issue in my opinion. So if you don't like the answer I guess you'll just whack me over the head. So be it. Photons do have mass! Relativistic mass (I originally...

What theory does this thinking belong to? There have been lot's of theories about the photon over the ages, Descartes ether theory, Newtons particle theory, Young's wave theory, Planck's quantum theory, Quantum Mechanics, Quantum Electrodynamics, Quantum Field Theory, String Theory, The...