Lostinspace 0 #26 November 3, 2004 QuoteOk here goes. We consider the application of the 'consistent lattice quantum gravity' approach ... blah blah ... show that in simple settings the proposal works satisfactorily. Hope that answers your question I think we were expecting a more practical application. Thankfully PhillyKev has a Spaceship. Maybe he’ll do skyhighkiy a favour Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #27 November 3, 2004 well, outside of the lab, I tend to measure things in other ways. Shitload = a lot of something Cunthair= a very small distance Hotter n' hell, cold as a witch's tit, etc. etc. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #28 November 3, 2004 DUDE.. since none of the Ultra Right Hand boys have chimed in yet.. Blame this on the French too. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zep 0 #29 November 3, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote --------------------- side note my personal research has shown given engineer+single yields 1st dates >> 2cd dates. I went into that subject with an engineer an we found that 2cd dates << 1dvd date and a blind date >> a bird in the bushel. Gone fishing Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skyhighkiy 0 #30 November 3, 2004 Sounds like a grand idea BE THE BUDDHA! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #31 November 3, 2004 Quote Sounds like a grand idea No really it is their fault.. http://www.essex1.com/people/speer/metric.html Used in nearly every country in the world the Metric System was devised by French scientists in the late 18th century to replace the chaotic collection of units then in use. The goal of this effort was to produce a system that did not rely on a miscellany of separate standards, and to use the decimal system rather than fractions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites slug 1 #32 November 3, 2004 QuoteA litre is equal to 0.03531 - cubic foot 61.02 - cubic inches 0.00629 - barrel pretroleum 0.2642 - gallon 1.057 - quart 2.113 - pint 8.454 - gill 33.81 - fluid ounce 270.5 - fluid dram 16230 - minim Does that help. ~Chachi So a pint is equal to how many ounces? Me thinks metric is the way to go. Especially when telling women how many CM us men have. Who said 12 inche's? sorry your confused I said 12 centimeter's.R.I.P. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites shunkka 0 #33 November 3, 2004 because it`s normal ------------------------- "jump, have fun, pull" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites piisfish 135 #34 November 3, 2004 QuoteYeah, what the question said....KG is a measure of mass, not weight....so shouldn't they be saying, "what's your mass"? and how does onego about developing a scale taht measures someone's kg rather than weight? weight=M x G it's just a misinterpretation. Weight is expressed in Newton... But in the common use of language people use it as weightscissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites bergh 0 #35 November 3, 2004 Metric system ... the rest of the wold does it but the US always have to be different go figure._______________________________________ You are unique, just like everybody else ... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,623 #36 November 3, 2004 QuoteQuoteYeah, what the question said....KG is a measure of mass, not weight....so shouldn't they be saying, "what's your mass"? and how does onego about developing a scale taht measures someone's kg rather than weight? weight=M x G it's just a misinterpretation. Weight is expressed in Newton... But in the common use of language people use it as weight It makes little difference as long as you are on the Earth's surface. The operation of determination of mass is, in most cases, a weighing operation anyway (we don't usually apply a standard force and measure the acceleration of the object, we measure the force of attraction to the Earth (gravity) which is weight, and compare it to that of a standard. Besides, "weighing" sounds OK, "massing" sounds like you're about to invade the neighboring country. If anyone asked "How much do you weigh" and you replied "820 Newtons" they would think you extremely wierd. Ditto if you said your mass was 4.7 slugs.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pilotdave 0 #37 November 3, 2004 If a British astronaut went to the moon, would he weigh the same thing that he does on earth? Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites piisfish 135 #38 November 3, 2004 QuoteBesides, "weighing" sounds OK, "massing" sounds like you're about to invade the neighboring country. so maybe some country got invaded because they were sponsored by Weightwatchers and only had weapons of weight destruction scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nacmacfeegle 0 #39 November 3, 2004 "We should all measure stuff in Stone! I am absolutely svelte when measured in Stone!" I hear you brother Deuce, and here's another, if you measure length in millimetres it sounds way more impressive. Folks, it doesn't really matter what unit we use, as long as we know how to convert between them.Just my tuppence (about 3.695 cents) worth.-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #40 November 3, 2004 Okay. Let's say we were on the moon and I was driving my truck, but it broke down. Here on earth, I would be able to push a 1,000 earth kilogram car a quarter mile to the next service station. This truck weighs 1,000 kilograms on the moon. But, it has a lot more mass to it. Issue - would I be able to push it (assuming I can get the same traction as on earth) or would it simply be too massive? Seems to me that even though it "weighs 1,000 kilos" its mass would still be 8,000 earth kilos. Could I push it? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pilotdave 0 #41 November 3, 2004 How much force it would take to move it depends on a couple of things. F=ma. The force needed to accelerate it depends on its mass. Mass hasn't changed. But then there's friction. Friction (at least between some surfaces in this case) is a function of weight, not mass. So some of the friction might be reduced (though some probably wouldn't change since you're not trying to drag the locked wheels over the ground). If it was a big box you were trying to push over the ground (to simplify things), and the surface of the moon was the same as the surface of earth, it'd be easier to push it on the moon because the weight is lower so the frictional force you need to overcome is lower. But if you went to the extreme case of a frictionless surface, it would take the same force to get it moving. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,623 #42 November 3, 2004 QuoteIf a British astronaut went to the moon, would he weigh the same thing that he does on earth? Dave What was the thing he was weighing on Earth?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jakee 1,255 #43 November 3, 2004 QuoteHere on earth, I would be able to push a 1,000 earth kilogram car a quarter mile to the next service station. This truck weighs 1,000 kilograms on the moon. But, it has a lot more mass to it. Yeah, when you start changing the value of g is whem you need to start using forces for weight. In this case you would be talking about your car weighing (roughly) 10kN on earth and your truck weighing 10kN on the moon but having different masses. QuoteIssue - would I be able to push it (assuming I can get the same traction as on earth) or would it simply be too massive? Seems to me that even though it "weighs 1,000 kilos" its mass would still be 8,000 earth kilos. So, assuming no friction, since your truck has more mass it will take more force from you to accelerate it at the same rate as your car. (kN= 1000Newtons ~100Kg under earth gravity)Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jakee 1,255 #44 November 3, 2004 QuoteHow much force it would take to move it depends on a couple of things. F=ma. The force needed to accelerate it depends on its mass. Mass hasn't changed. Read it again, I think the hypothetical was that his truck weighed the same on the moon as the car does on earth, although he expressed that weight in Kg he meant the moon truck was more massive. (lawrocket, was that right?) Which is why Kg as 'weight' is fine if you're staying on earth but quite confusing if you don't.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DALAILAMA 0 #45 November 3, 2004 I can't believe you people are discussing this, it is so obvious... 'Because of the metric system' -Brad "Look at the brain on Brad!" - Jules"Dropzone.com, where uneducated people measuring penises, has become an art form" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites smooth 0 #46 November 3, 2004 QuoteQuoteIf a British astronaut went to the moon, would he weigh the same thing that he does on earth? Dave What was the thing he was weighing on Earth? pumpkins ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pilotdave 0 #47 November 3, 2004 One of my favorites from college... a question on an exam started off with "a 10 pound mass hangs on a string..." or something like that. Some people misread it as 10 pound-mass (why lbs are ever used for mass never made sense to me either) and multiplied it by g to get the weight. Talk about reading too far into something. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skyhighkiy 0 #48 November 4, 2004 10 lb mass.... Weight= Mass times acceleration N= kg (m/s^2) or in American terms Lb=kg (m/s^2) so 10=kg (9.81 m/s^2) ? Dalailama, I don't think it's an obvious question at all. can anyone answer this though? If I have a 10 kg object, its weight is 10 kg times 9.81 m/s^2 lets say you put it on th emoon and the acceleration due to gravity is 5.3 m/s^2....what do you ppl say the "weight" is on the moon? I guess, if you measure weight in kg, then what is your formula for figuring out weight due to gravity? BE THE BUDDHA! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pa2themd 0 #49 November 4, 2004 it's just a misinterpretation. Weight is expressed in Newton... But in the common use of language people use it as weight Not just a pretty face huh? "Most of us can read the writing on the wall; we just assume it's addressed to someone else!" Ivern Ball Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nacmacfeegle 0 #50 November 4, 2004 " Let's say we were on the moon and I was driving my truck, but it broke down. " It would probably a problem with the air filter.............-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 2 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
skyhighkiy 0 #30 November 3, 2004 Sounds like a grand idea BE THE BUDDHA! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #31 November 3, 2004 Quote Sounds like a grand idea No really it is their fault.. http://www.essex1.com/people/speer/metric.html Used in nearly every country in the world the Metric System was devised by French scientists in the late 18th century to replace the chaotic collection of units then in use. The goal of this effort was to produce a system that did not rely on a miscellany of separate standards, and to use the decimal system rather than fractions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
slug 1 #32 November 3, 2004 QuoteA litre is equal to 0.03531 - cubic foot 61.02 - cubic inches 0.00629 - barrel pretroleum 0.2642 - gallon 1.057 - quart 2.113 - pint 8.454 - gill 33.81 - fluid ounce 270.5 - fluid dram 16230 - minim Does that help. ~Chachi So a pint is equal to how many ounces? Me thinks metric is the way to go. Especially when telling women how many CM us men have. Who said 12 inche's? sorry your confused I said 12 centimeter's.R.I.P. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shunkka 0 #33 November 3, 2004 because it`s normal ------------------------- "jump, have fun, pull" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piisfish 135 #34 November 3, 2004 QuoteYeah, what the question said....KG is a measure of mass, not weight....so shouldn't they be saying, "what's your mass"? and how does onego about developing a scale taht measures someone's kg rather than weight? weight=M x G it's just a misinterpretation. Weight is expressed in Newton... But in the common use of language people use it as weightscissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bergh 0 #35 November 3, 2004 Metric system ... the rest of the wold does it but the US always have to be different go figure._______________________________________ You are unique, just like everybody else ... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #36 November 3, 2004 QuoteQuoteYeah, what the question said....KG is a measure of mass, not weight....so shouldn't they be saying, "what's your mass"? and how does onego about developing a scale taht measures someone's kg rather than weight? weight=M x G it's just a misinterpretation. Weight is expressed in Newton... But in the common use of language people use it as weight It makes little difference as long as you are on the Earth's surface. The operation of determination of mass is, in most cases, a weighing operation anyway (we don't usually apply a standard force and measure the acceleration of the object, we measure the force of attraction to the Earth (gravity) which is weight, and compare it to that of a standard. Besides, "weighing" sounds OK, "massing" sounds like you're about to invade the neighboring country. If anyone asked "How much do you weigh" and you replied "820 Newtons" they would think you extremely wierd. Ditto if you said your mass was 4.7 slugs.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #37 November 3, 2004 If a British astronaut went to the moon, would he weigh the same thing that he does on earth? Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piisfish 135 #38 November 3, 2004 QuoteBesides, "weighing" sounds OK, "massing" sounds like you're about to invade the neighboring country. so maybe some country got invaded because they were sponsored by Weightwatchers and only had weapons of weight destruction scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #39 November 3, 2004 "We should all measure stuff in Stone! I am absolutely svelte when measured in Stone!" I hear you brother Deuce, and here's another, if you measure length in millimetres it sounds way more impressive. Folks, it doesn't really matter what unit we use, as long as we know how to convert between them.Just my tuppence (about 3.695 cents) worth.-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #40 November 3, 2004 Okay. Let's say we were on the moon and I was driving my truck, but it broke down. Here on earth, I would be able to push a 1,000 earth kilogram car a quarter mile to the next service station. This truck weighs 1,000 kilograms on the moon. But, it has a lot more mass to it. Issue - would I be able to push it (assuming I can get the same traction as on earth) or would it simply be too massive? Seems to me that even though it "weighs 1,000 kilos" its mass would still be 8,000 earth kilos. Could I push it? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #41 November 3, 2004 How much force it would take to move it depends on a couple of things. F=ma. The force needed to accelerate it depends on its mass. Mass hasn't changed. But then there's friction. Friction (at least between some surfaces in this case) is a function of weight, not mass. So some of the friction might be reduced (though some probably wouldn't change since you're not trying to drag the locked wheels over the ground). If it was a big box you were trying to push over the ground (to simplify things), and the surface of the moon was the same as the surface of earth, it'd be easier to push it on the moon because the weight is lower so the frictional force you need to overcome is lower. But if you went to the extreme case of a frictionless surface, it would take the same force to get it moving. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #42 November 3, 2004 QuoteIf a British astronaut went to the moon, would he weigh the same thing that he does on earth? Dave What was the thing he was weighing on Earth?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,255 #43 November 3, 2004 QuoteHere on earth, I would be able to push a 1,000 earth kilogram car a quarter mile to the next service station. This truck weighs 1,000 kilograms on the moon. But, it has a lot more mass to it. Yeah, when you start changing the value of g is whem you need to start using forces for weight. In this case you would be talking about your car weighing (roughly) 10kN on earth and your truck weighing 10kN on the moon but having different masses. QuoteIssue - would I be able to push it (assuming I can get the same traction as on earth) or would it simply be too massive? Seems to me that even though it "weighs 1,000 kilos" its mass would still be 8,000 earth kilos. So, assuming no friction, since your truck has more mass it will take more force from you to accelerate it at the same rate as your car. (kN= 1000Newtons ~100Kg under earth gravity)Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,255 #44 November 3, 2004 QuoteHow much force it would take to move it depends on a couple of things. F=ma. The force needed to accelerate it depends on its mass. Mass hasn't changed. Read it again, I think the hypothetical was that his truck weighed the same on the moon as the car does on earth, although he expressed that weight in Kg he meant the moon truck was more massive. (lawrocket, was that right?) Which is why Kg as 'weight' is fine if you're staying on earth but quite confusing if you don't.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DALAILAMA 0 #45 November 3, 2004 I can't believe you people are discussing this, it is so obvious... 'Because of the metric system' -Brad "Look at the brain on Brad!" - Jules"Dropzone.com, where uneducated people measuring penises, has become an art form" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
smooth 0 #46 November 3, 2004 QuoteQuoteIf a British astronaut went to the moon, would he weigh the same thing that he does on earth? Dave What was the thing he was weighing on Earth? pumpkins ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #47 November 3, 2004 One of my favorites from college... a question on an exam started off with "a 10 pound mass hangs on a string..." or something like that. Some people misread it as 10 pound-mass (why lbs are ever used for mass never made sense to me either) and multiplied it by g to get the weight. Talk about reading too far into something. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyhighkiy 0 #48 November 4, 2004 10 lb mass.... Weight= Mass times acceleration N= kg (m/s^2) or in American terms Lb=kg (m/s^2) so 10=kg (9.81 m/s^2) ? Dalailama, I don't think it's an obvious question at all. can anyone answer this though? If I have a 10 kg object, its weight is 10 kg times 9.81 m/s^2 lets say you put it on th emoon and the acceleration due to gravity is 5.3 m/s^2....what do you ppl say the "weight" is on the moon? I guess, if you measure weight in kg, then what is your formula for figuring out weight due to gravity? BE THE BUDDHA! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pa2themd 0 #49 November 4, 2004 it's just a misinterpretation. Weight is expressed in Newton... But in the common use of language people use it as weight Not just a pretty face huh? "Most of us can read the writing on the wall; we just assume it's addressed to someone else!" Ivern Ball Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #50 November 4, 2004 " Let's say we were on the moon and I was driving my truck, but it broke down. " It would probably a problem with the air filter.............-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
