The January Philosophy Book of the Month 2019 is The Runaway Species. Discuss The Runaway Species now.

The February Philosophy Book of the Month is The Fourth Age by Byron Reese (Nominated by RJG.) Discuss The Fourth Age now.

Experiment to test W=mg

Use this forum to discuss the philosophy of science. Philosophy of science deals with the assumptions, foundations, and implications of science.
User avatar
Yaniv
New Trial Member
Posts: 18
Joined: May 28th, 2018, 12:13 pm

Experiment to test W=mg

Post by Yaniv » May 28th, 2018, 12:29 pm

Classical physics predicts weight (W) should not change at increasing temperature (T) in vacuum. Relativistic physics predicts W should increase at increasing T in vacuum. My theory predicts W should decrease at increasing T in vacuum. W reduction at increasing T in vacuum disproves conservation of mass and most of the rest of physics. Over the past ten years I contacted thousands of scientists to weigh a heated metal in vacuum and publish the results. I didn't get the results of the experiment. #ResultsRequired

User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 1122
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Experiment to test W=mg

Post by ThomasHobbes » May 31st, 2018, 4:05 am

You do know that there is a difference between weight and mass?
That the conservation of mass is not the same as the conservation of weight?
That T might change G without altering the mass, which is objective?

User avatar
Yaniv
New Trial Member
Posts: 18
Joined: May 28th, 2018, 12:13 pm

Re: Experiment to test W=mg

Post by Yaniv » May 31st, 2018, 9:08 am

ThomasHobbes wrote:
May 31st, 2018, 4:05 am
You do know that there is a difference between weight and mass?
That the conservation of mass is not the same as the conservation of weight?
That T might change G without altering the mass, which is objective?
In air buoyancy and convection currents could introduce a difference between W and m. Not in vacuum. Under the conditions of the proposed experiment, weighing a metal in vacuum, W and m are the same.
If hot and cold objects fall at the same rate i.e. T does not change g (as my theory and traditional physics predict) a change in W is a change in m.

User avatar
-1-
Posts: 878
Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am

Re: Experiment to test W=mg

Post by -1- » May 31st, 2018, 2:32 pm

Yaniv wrote:
May 28th, 2018, 12:29 pm
Classical physics predicts weight (W) should not change at increasing temperature (T) in vacuum. Relativistic physics predicts W should increase at increasing T in vacuum. My theory predicts W should decrease at increasing T in vacuum. W reduction at increasing T in vacuum disproves conservation of mass and most of the rest of physics. Over the past ten years I contacted thousands of scientists to weigh a heated metal in vacuum and publish the results. I didn't get the results of the experiment. #ResultsRequired
Assuming you meant mass by W.

If T increases of a body in vacuum, it comes form external sources. The energy of the object increases. It is supplied by an external source. Therefore the conservation of mass and energy is upheld by the theory.

You are probably saying that an increase in T ought to reduce the mass of the body, as it ought to be at a constant energy level. But it is not, if it is increasing in heat.

A body change its own temperature by staying at the same mass. If it uses its own chemical energy, to heat itself up, then the energy stored in chemical energy becomes heat energy. Mass does not change.

A body can change its own temperature by reducing its own mass. This happens in nuclear reaction. A splitting nucleus of an atom releases energy and a tiny amount of matter "disappears", ie. gets converted into the energy that heats up the body.

This is nothing revolutionary or new. Your thought experiment is valid, if the body is not heated up by an outside source. But then it gets heated by its own stored chemical energy, (no change in mass) or by its own matter getting converted to energy (loss of mass).

I think, or rather, I hope to think, that the physicists to whom you sent your experiment proposal, had this knowledge, and that is why they did not bother with the experimenting.
This search engine is powered by Hunger, Thirst, and a desperate need to Mate.

User avatar
-1-
Posts: 878
Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am

Re: Experiment to test W=mg

Post by -1- » May 31st, 2018, 2:35 pm

The beginning of the fourth paragraph above:
A body change its own temperature
Should be understood and changed to
A body can change its own temperature
This search engine is powered by Hunger, Thirst, and a desperate need to Mate.

User avatar
Yaniv
New Trial Member
Posts: 18
Joined: May 28th, 2018, 12:13 pm

Re: Experiment to test W=mg

Post by Yaniv » May 31st, 2018, 4:02 pm

W reduction at increasing T in vacuum disproves E=mc2 and mass/energy equivalence. Can you think of other reasons why the results of this experiment is missing from the literature ?

User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 1122
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Experiment to test W=mg

Post by ThomasHobbes » May 31st, 2018, 6:00 pm

Yaniv wrote:
May 31st, 2018, 9:08 am
ThomasHobbes wrote:
May 31st, 2018, 4:05 am
You do know that there is a difference between weight and mass?
That the conservation of mass is not the same as the conservation of weight?
That T might change G without altering the mass, which is objective?
In air buoyancy and convection currents could introduce a difference between W and m.
No it could not. Obviously you do not understand your terms.

User avatar
-1-
Posts: 878
Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am

Re: Experiment to test W=mg

Post by -1- » May 31st, 2018, 8:29 pm

Yaniv wrote:
May 31st, 2018, 4:02 pm
W reduction at increasing T in vacuum disproves E=mc2 and mass/energy equivalence. Can you think of other reasons why the results of this experiment is missing from the literature ?
What exactly do you mean by "W"?

The results of this experiment is missing from the literature because W is undefined, and you do not specify what increases the temperature and what reduces the W of the body of T temperature and W something. (If you mean temperature by T. Maybe you mean time. Or the letter T in upper case.)
This search engine is powered by Hunger, Thirst, and a desperate need to Mate.

User avatar
Yaniv
New Trial Member
Posts: 18
Joined: May 28th, 2018, 12:13 pm

Re: Experiment to test W=mg

Post by Yaniv » May 31st, 2018, 11:19 pm

"W" is what you measure with a balance.

User avatar
-1-
Posts: 878
Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am

Re: Experiment to test W=mg

Post by -1- » June 1st, 2018, 2:30 pm

Yaniv wrote:
May 31st, 2018, 11:19 pm
"W" is what you measure with a balance.
sorry to bother you again, but what does g stand for in your equation?

And what does m stand for in your equation?

What does T stand for in your equation?
======================

Your question must be understood first, before it could be answered. We, other respondents in your thread, made stabs in the dark trying to guess at their meaning. But that's not good. You please kindly tell us what you mean by each letter you used in the expression.
This search engine is powered by Hunger, Thirst, and a desperate need to Mate.

User avatar
Yaniv
New Trial Member
Posts: 18
Joined: May 28th, 2018, 12:13 pm

Re: Experiment to test W=mg

Post by Yaniv » June 1st, 2018, 2:56 pm

W (weight) = m (mass) * g (gravity)
T (temperature)

User avatar
Halc
Posts: 290
Joined: March 17th, 2018, 9:47 pm

Re: Experiment to test W=mg

Post by Halc » June 1st, 2018, 9:42 pm

Yaniv wrote:
May 31st, 2018, 11:19 pm
"W" is what you measure with a balance.
Not so. Weight is a force, and you measure force with something like a spring. A spring scale might say I weigh 2 stones on the moon, but a balance scale would measure me at 12 stones on the moon. Clearly weight is not what it is measuring.

User avatar
Yaniv
New Trial Member
Posts: 18
Joined: May 28th, 2018, 12:13 pm

Re: Experiment to test W=mg

Post by Yaniv » June 1st, 2018, 11:49 pm

Halc wrote:
June 1st, 2018, 9:42 pm
Yaniv wrote:
May 31st, 2018, 11:19 pm
"W" is what you measure with a balance.
Not so. Weight is a force, and you measure force with something like a spring. A spring scale might say I weigh 2 stones on the moon, but a balance scale would measure me at 12 stones on the moon. Clearly weight is not what it is measuring.
If your spring and balance scales measure different W at the same geographical position one has to be calibrated.

User avatar
-1-
Posts: 878
Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am

Re: Experiment to test W=mg

Post by -1- » June 2nd, 2018, 4:22 am

Yaniv wrote:
June 1st, 2018, 2:56 pm
W (weight) = m (mass) * g (gravity)
T (temperature)
That's curious. Weight is a quantity that has measurement units; mass is a quantity that has measurement units; they are different dimensions in the sense of unit compositions.

Gravity is not a measurable unit. Not in Newtonian physics anyway. Gravitational force is, but gravity is not. g is normally used as a short form for acceleration due to gravity near the Earth's surface. That is acceleration, not gravity. It is nearly 8.9 meters divided by second squares.

Haic already pointed it out to you that weight is a force, it is not mass.

Physics is more complicated than you would believe, Yaniv. Your postulate can be discarded as a feeble attempt at physics understanding by a complete dilettante.

Not trying to be mean, but you are in the dark feeling your way. You show nothing but a near-complete ignorance of basic physics concepts.

This insight is enough I think to enable you to see why no physics departments took on your experiment proposal.
This search engine is powered by Hunger, Thirst, and a desperate need to Mate.

User avatar
-1-
Posts: 878
Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am

Re: Experiment to test W=mg

Post by -1- » June 2nd, 2018, 4:26 am

Yaniv wrote:
June 1st, 2018, 11:49 pm
Halc wrote:
June 1st, 2018, 9:42 pm

Not so. Weight is a force, and you measure force with something like a spring. A spring scale might say I weigh 2 stones on the moon, but a balance scale would measure me at 12 stones on the moon. Clearly weight is not what it is measuring.
If your spring and balance scales measure different W at the same geographical position one has to be calibrated.
Not really. After the most careful calibration, if both are accelerated at the same rate, in any direction but perpendicular to the vertical axis of the scale / spring, then even if they are calibrated, they will show different values.

The scale will keep on showing 12 tonnes, whereas the spring will show more than twelve tonnes if the acceleration is somewhat away from the Earth, and will show less than twelve tonnes if the acceleration brings it toward the Earth.
This search engine is powered by Hunger, Thirst, and a desperate need to Mate.

Post Reply