Vectors & Scalars: Understanding Directional Properties

  • Thread starter Thread starter StephenPrivitera
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Scalars Vectors
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the definitions and properties of scalars and vectors, particularly in relation to physical concepts like work and potential energy. Scalars are described as quantities with magnitude but no direction, while vectors have both magnitude and direction, which can be represented with positive and negative signs. The conversation highlights the confusion surrounding the use of negative values in scalar quantities, especially in contexts like work and energy, where directionality is implied. Participants clarify that while scalars can be positive or negative, their interpretation can vary based on the context, such as changes in position or energy. Ultimately, the distinction between scalars and vectors is rooted in their mathematical definitions and transformation properties.
  • #61
Originally posted by DavidW
Too late, I just reported you recomending your dismissal for threatening me

David, I am a moderator here. One of my duties is to issue warnings. I did not threaten you, I just did my job, and the Administrator has told me he will back me up on it.

Seriously, what did you hope to accomplish with this? I got this position because the Administrator recognized me as one of the more knowledgeable members. You, on the other hand, are just some raving looney who walked in off the street. Surely you knew this was a losing battle?

and asked for a link for where I could cancel my own memebership

Like I said, we'll handle it for you ASAP. You'll be able to tell your changed status by your new title, "Cracker".

due to your cranky responces in the face of physics facts and the truth.

You simply do not know what you are talking about.

As I pointed out, we were talking about matters of definition here. There is no inherent "truth" or "factuality" in definitions. I only tried to explain to you what the standard convention is and that it differs from what you hold to. You need to study more physics, simple as that.

Seriously David, you blew it at this message board over nothing.

You are not a physicist.

Not yet, but I am working on my thesis.

I am, but you lost me.

You flatter yourself too much. Your profile says that you have an MS in physics and teach at the college level. I hate to burst your bubble, but an MS does not a physicist make. Hell, I am more advanced in my education than you, and I won't call myself a physicist until I finish my PhD.

Guess your stuck with pmb and yourself (prabably you are pmb under a second name)

Hear that ladies? He's got all that, and psychosis too. What a catch! LOL

who merely speculates what actual physics is about.

Some speculation is OK, but I prefer the "study and research" approach. Give it a shot sometime, it will really help you out.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
LMAO! Its always funny to see physics arguments get s personal. Davidw, you shouldn't hold a grudge like that. It just looks like you have issues with PMB, not like you are trying to discuss the issue here. And oh yeah, that quite curtious of you to cancel your own membership to a place you don't like, instead of just leaving. Ha ha ha ha ha.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
8K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
17K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K