Questions about forces Newton's Laws (first law)

  • Thread starter holezch
  • Start date
  • #26
ZapperZ
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Insights Author
35,847
4,669
Ok, so you are saying that no one knows why ??? The point I was trying to make and get at, and please sorry if I sounded rude, or got of your or anyone’s nerves, I did not mean to, but as no force {strength} is needed, this seems to be going against all physics laws, as is it being moved by magic ??? Well of course, not you will say no.

Ok, this does not happen, if there is air resistance, so for now that is our clue. In addition, has gravity got anything to do with it ??? Alternatively, maybe whatever object you push to a certain speed, just follows on the rest of the moving Universe.

Hold on just thought of something, as there is not air in space, so why have they not tried this experiment there ??? But look at this videos, Newton's First Law does not seem to be working, as the tool bag drifted off, but then stopped and just stayed there ??? And the camera did.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTBFlSwtBKc&feature=related

Or maybe it is one of those things like how/why did our little Universe start out with so nearly the critical rate of expansion. And even now Billions of years after what we call the Big Bang it’s still expanding at nearly the critical rate ???

Wayne
It is sad that you are using youtube videos as valid experiments. Would you like to see 'evidence' that cell phone signals can make popcorn pop? Do you not care about the validity of your sources?

You need to look up symmetry principles, especially something on translational symmetry principle of our universe. And note also that Newtonian laws are invariant when you transform from one inertial frames to another. This means that if you don't see a force in the rest frame where an object is stationary, transforming it to another inertial reference frame where that object is in motion should NOT result in the presence of a force. Having otherwise will not make any physical sense. That is why I said that it is YOU who has the explaining to do, not me.

You should NOT confuse yourself with the spacetime expansion that is connected to the Big Bang. That has nothing to do with motion within spacetime itself, which is what this is all about. This is more elementary.

Zz.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #27
398
1
It is sad that you are using youtube videos as valid experiments. Would you like to see 'evidence' that cell phone signals can make popcorn pop? Do you not care about the validity of your sources?

You need to look up symmetry principles, especially something on translational symmetry principle of our universe. And note also that Newtonian laws are invariant when you transform from one inertial frames to another. This means that if you don't see a force in the rest frame where an object is stationary, transforming it to another inertial reference frame where that object is in motion should NOT result in the presence of a force. Having otherwise will not make any physical sense. That is why I said that it is YOU who has the explaining to do, not me.

You should NOT confuse yourself with the spacetime expansion that is connected to the Big Bang. That has nothing to do with motion within spacetime itself, which is what this is all about. This is more elementary.

Zz.
Hi and thx, it a bit late here for a full repply, and will double read what you wrote again, however, that was a real spacewalk by NASA.

Wayne
 
  • #28
ZapperZ
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Insights Author
35,847
4,669
Hi and thx, it a bit late here for a full repply, and will double read what you wrote again, however, that was a real spacewalk by NASA.

Wayne
My reply has nothing to do with the video. My reply was on the NATURE of the source.

Besides, how such a video can somehow be used to argue for what you're saying is rather puzzling. I don't quite know why it would even be relevant here.

Zz.
 
  • #29
398
1
My reply has nothing to do with the video. My reply was on the NATURE of the source.

Besides, how such a video can somehow be used to argue for what you're saying is rather puzzling. I don't quite know why it would even be relevant here.

Zz.
Hi ZapperZ,

Well the video was in a real life situation, deep in the middle of space with no air. And this is where Newton’s Law should have worked. But it did not, or am I missing something ??? As the 2 object went off, but did not keep going on at the same speed, they slowly stoped. Showing that all bodies moving with a velocity do not remain moving with a constant velocity unless a force is applied to a body. (According to Newton’s laws).

Wayne
 
  • #30
ZapperZ
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Insights Author
35,847
4,669
Hi ZapperZ,

Well the video was in a real life situation, deep in the middle of space with no air. And this is where Newton’s Law should have worked. But it did not, or am I missing something ??? As the 2 object went off, but did not keep going on at the same speed, they slowly stoped. Showing that all bodies moving with a velocity do not remain moving with a constant velocity unless a force is applied to a body. (According to Newton’s laws).

Wayne
Then I suggest you write to NASA, and tell them that one of their videos have violated Newton's laws, and ask for an explanation. Tell them too that they should use this new discovery to maneuver the space shuttle, rather than use those darn pesky thrusters that obviously make use of the outdated Newton's laws.

Zz.
 

Related Threads on Questions about forces Newton's Laws (first law)

  • Last Post
3
Replies
54
Views
6K
  • Last Post
Replies
13
Views
9K
  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
19K
Replies
3
Views
735
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
694
Replies
4
Views
760
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
765
Replies
5
Views
2K
Top