My Thread Closed: Speed Has Direction

  • Thread starter Thread starter omin
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on a debate about the nature of speed in physics, specifically whether speed has direction. One participant challenges another, Tom, to engage in a debate, asserting that speed is a scalar quantity and does not possess direction, contrasting it with velocity, which is a vector. The challenger criticizes Tom's previous behavior as rude and lacking understanding of fundamental physics principles. The conversation escalates with warnings about potential consequences for continued disrespectful dialogue. Ultimately, the thread highlights the importance of respectful discourse in scientific discussions and the need for clarity on fundamental concepts.
omin
Messages
187
Reaction score
1
The discussion wasn't over Tom. I assume you closed it because the rudeness and ingnorance on fundamentals I've experienced with you before.

I challege you Tom to debate this if you really think it's nonsense that speed doesn't have direction. I'll beat you every step of the way, because I have respect for the roots in which physics grew out of. You seem not to understand the fundamentals. By my experience of your non-intelligent but yet rude reations to people on this site, you seem to be more of a mocking bird of suggested teachings than one who understands the principles that the teachings are based upon.

If you really think you can debate me and win, open the thread and bring it on.

If not, then don't call yourself a mentor, because mentors lead in the right direction. They don't shut doors. Give up. And behave rudely to people. That is for the weak minded teachers I've met in my life. And you act just like one!

If you think you're so smart and call yourself a mentor physicist, then beat me in argument on this topic. I know you can't, and I'll prove it, given the opportunity that any leader would take to show how to debate and lead in the correct direction.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The word speed, as used with a physicst's definition, is a scalar quantity. It does not have direction.

- Warren
 
omin said:
I challege you Tom to debate this if you really think it's nonsense that speed doesn't have direction.

Speed (s) is the magnitude of the velocity vector (v).

Certainly the velocity vector has direction, quantified by θ:

v=v cos(θ)i+v sin(θ)j.

But when we calculate the speed we get:

s=(v.v)1/2
s=(v2cos(0))1/2
s=v

Now do you see any θ-dependence in there? Neither do I.

This is a simple matter of definition that is taught in any basic physics course. You should enroll in one.

Now that that is over with: Cut the crap, or we will cut it for you. If you want to ask questions, that's fine. If you want to make false assertions supported by nonsensical arguments (as is your habbit), then that's not fine. If you keep doing what you've been doing, then you are going to find yourself taking a vacation from Physics Forums in the very near future.
 
I want to thank those members who interacted with me a couple of years ago in two Optics Forum threads. They were @Drakkith, @hutchphd, @Gleb1964, and @KAHR-Alpha. I had something I wanted the scientific community to know and slipped a new idea in against the rules. Thank you also to @berkeman for suggesting paths to meet with academia. Anyway, I finally got a paper on the same matter as discussed in those forum threads, the fat lens model, got it peer-reviewed, and IJRAP...
About 20 years ago, in my mid-30s (and with a BA in economics and a master's in business), I started taking night classes in physics hoping to eventually earn the science degree I'd always wanted but never pursued. I found physics forums and used it to ask questions I was unable to get answered from my textbooks or class lectures. Unfortunately, work and life got in the way and I never got further the freshman courses. Well, here it is 20 years later. I'm in my mid-50s now, and in a...

Similar threads

Back
Top