Theory development. Please test.

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter yesicanread
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Test Theory
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the conceptual relationship between geometric shapes, specifically a pentagon and triangles, and physical principles such as action and reaction, as well as Planck's constant. Participants explore the implications of these ideas in terms of energy conservation and linear reactions, with a focus on definitions and logical coherence in geometric propositions.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes a relationship between a pentagon and energy conservation through geometric constructs, suggesting that a triangle within the pentagon can represent action and reaction.
  • Another participant questions the understanding of definitions and logic in the initial post, implying a lack of clarity in the geometric propositions presented.
  • Several participants assert that two linear points on a pentagon are equivalent to Planck's constant, with one emphasizing the necessity of recognizing this connection.
  • One participant expresses confusion regarding the initial post and requests clarification on the logic presented, highlighting a perceived flaw in the argumentation.
  • Another participant claims that a cup can be acted upon to create five linear reactions, suggesting a breakthrough in understanding energy conservation.
  • One participant reiterates the connection between action and reaction, emphasizing that energy is conserved and questioning the understanding of their initial text.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of the initial geometric propositions and the connection to Planck's constant. There is no consensus on the interpretations or the logical coherence of the arguments presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference geometric definitions and principles without establishing a common understanding, leading to confusion and disagreement. The discussion includes speculative claims about the implications of geometric shapes on physical laws.

yesicanread
Messages
138
Reaction score
0
- On a pentagon. Two linear points are:
(A) Equal, and opposite reaction.
or
(B) Planks constant.

- The pentagon is on a plane. A plane can be defined by three points.

- The three points can conserve energy.Three lines.

- (Action = Reaction = 1 Line) + (Geometry = 3 planar, non-colinear, points) = 3 Points conserve energy, A Triangle.

- TheTriangle contains Action.

- The Triangles Action (Line) = Reaction (Line) < 2 Reaction(2 Lines)

- Where is the fourth line ?
The Plane = the Plane. So a point outside the triangle isn't correct.
The point for the fourth line must be within the triangle, Equaling Action.

- When we count a Triangle, we don't count the Triangle Action point.
TheTriangle contains action(Line). Less than 2 Reactions(2 Lines)
2 Reactions(2 Lines), equal and opposite the Triangle Action.
A Pentagon, with a center point that causes Action.

- Create the absence of Planks constant (Action = Line).
The equal and opposite reaction will be 5 reactions(Lines)
(A) Equal and opposite to the absence of plank's constant, A Line.
(B) Equall and opposite to the action made, A line.

- Using division.
A cup can be acted upon to cause 5 linear reactions, filling the cup. .
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This is "organic" or "lama" , etc. right?

Anway, you apparently don't know what a "definition" is.
 
HallsofIvy said:
This is "organic" or "lama" , etc. right?

Anway, you apparently don't know what a "definition" is.

I don't Know lama.

I don't knoe organic.

I don't know Euclid.

What are you saying. About definitions. Please point out your logic here. Where's the flaw. :rolleyes:
 
yesicanread said:
I don't Know lama.

I don't knoe organic.

I don't know Euclid.

What are you saying. About definitions. Please point out your logic here. Where's the flaw. :rolleyes:

You don't know who Euclid is and you're making a proposition on geometry?
Not to mention that's his signature.
 
It seems obvious to me that two linear points on a pentagon are Planks constant, you'd have to be a fool not to see it.
 
jcsd said:
It seems obvious to me that two linear points on a pentagon are Planks constant, you'd have to be a fool not to see it.
It looks like a pigeon to me...
 
yesicanread said:
A cup can be acted upon to cause 5 linear reactions, filling the cup. .

A real breakthrough!
 
jcsd said:
It seems obvious to me that two linear points on a pentagon are Planks constant, you'd have to be a fool not to see it.

Action = Reaction. Energy is conserved. Action in a line conserves energy.

What ! You's don know my text from what I says to you's ? You's think is true ? My text. Or you's think is false. My text.

Ranting aside.

What don't you understand in my initial post in this thread.
 
jcsd said:
It seems obvious to me that two linear points on a pentagon are Planks constant, you'd have to be a fool not to see it.

Russell E. Rierson said:
Planck's constant, h, has units of energy multiplied by time, which are the units of action.

Since energy is conserved, Action = Reaction...Yes, the shortest distance between two points is a straight line; energy is conserved.

There be the sense to percieve my jibber...jabber...in my initial post in this here thread ye be seein now. Aye.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K