Recent content by zach12_2

I was thinking about the scaling factor like you did in your post when I hastily proposed an alternative series a few posts above. (Darn my late nights!) As one poster previously pointed out the mass should scale with the cube of the height. So it would be the sum as n goes from 0 to infinity...

"Mass is directly proportional to the cube of the scale." Ah, first year physics is coming back to me now... I feel silly for having forgot that. I've been doing too much pure math I suppose. Thanks, again for clarifying.

The professor said that the series represents the mass of successive generations of benders. Now since the machine that duplicates objects creates two of every object it duplicates if follows that for a given generation of benders, n, there are Sum from 0 to n {2^n} benders. Whoops. That's...

I noticed an inconsistency as well. Bender states that his first two replicas were "60% scale replicas." That suggests a series of the form: n from zero to infinity, M(n) = (n+1)((.6)^n)(MNaught) Such a series should accurately describe the total mass of all benders at a given generation n...

Funny. Everyone is so serious here its nice to see some levity. I don't suggest that I am capable of creating, as you call it a "z-mechanics" (very funny by the way), nor do I endorse it as a realistic method. There is nothing wrong with our current view of classical mechanics. I was simply...

I am not proposing a change to the current systems and methods. I was simply exploring the idea for the joy of it. It was an interesting idea to me and one that afforded me an opportunity to learn. Relax physics is independent of any person's interpretation. Which is my point in all this.

I understand what you are saying, but if we had defined the concepts such as force differently from its inception, would we not come up with laws that mean the same thing in our new framework, but are expressed differently from the form proposed by Newton. I am not saying physics as it is today...

As I stated before, I if you used this formulation then Force would be measured by a device consistent with F=m/a. We measure our physical quatities in abstract terms, force only has a quantitative measure relative to man's definition of a unit of force. Though your point regarding what force is...

I am a very mathematical person. I excel in my mathematics courses. In physics, on the other hand, I have always felt less than an expert. I am by no definition a bad physics student. Being mathematically minded I see relationships easily. So physics is not difficult for me to do. What has...