Mass
(General Revision 06-06-2011, rad)
Mass is a measurement. Measuring is not a requirement for the actions or existence of the Universe. As thus a measurement... what mass might be, is only arguing about what, and what way we measure properties of matter.
I am again, doing a rewrite of Mass, as of today, Saturday, 01-14-2012... I do this every so often because, my thoughts on subjects don't just stop once I have written something down... and I often feel I can improve on the presentation; I also correct thoughts I have written down if I find them in error, or discover something I didn't know... I rewrite, thus...
Mass, as I percept, is threefold. The first measure of mass is the pressure measurement that is applied opposite, or against the inertia pressure exerted by a body of matter. There is an innate property of matter that offers resistance pressure against any change of state of its body of matter, called Inertia. These two opposing measurements set the values for mass and inertial. In nature, both mass and inertial are endlessly, and continually in a state of change. If something is pressured into motion, continually faster and faster (acceleration); it will just be harder and harder to push until it reaches light speed, and goes boom. In nature any body has no weight, size, speed, and etc., it is just there, and goes with whatever else is happening. However mankind set standards to measure things. Measuring one kilogram moving one meter in one second, via trial and error actually sets the level of mass, and inertia of a body of matter in the idle condition upon Earth. This is the first at rest level of mass. The second measure of mass is the additional pressure resistance to moving inertia resistance, (more than the at rest condition), of a body of matter. This mass pressure opposes the directional pressure force action of a body coming at you. This mass pressure is the pressure that it would take to make a body return to its at rest state. The third measure of mass is again an additional amount of pressure resistance that occurs, in, and due to space, or an ether within space; when matter is in motion through space. This directional space mass is always present, but is only significant at speeds close to light speed. If space is strictly considered just three dimensional volume... then, this third mass measurement is of the resistance an ether contained in space. (I have more on this in the section on energy.)
It is important to know that as I put forth herein... the measurement of all Mass is a measure of motion of bodies interacting in a compression/expansion motion scenario, which is likewise a relative measure, of pressure. Actually when we see something, in motion; it is light photons, pressure impacting a body for an instant, then reflected, to us from the compression and expansion of the body... on towards and into our eyes; then the photons exert pressure to compress the rods and cones of our eyes which send signals to our brain to give us sight of the body at approximately the location and moment of where and when, it got hit with the light photons. This continues while we keep watching the body. If we measured the oncoming pressure of the light photons that impact our eyes we would be measuring the directional mass of the photons particles. Another example of measuring mass is if I hold a common floor bathroom weighing scale vertically and push it against another person's chest, the scale will read some amount of pressure because of the resistance pressure returned by the other persons body. As I do this action and read the numbers on the scale, I am measuring the inertial pressure of the other persons body. At the same time, the other person is looking at the same numbers and measuring the pressure of the mass, that I, and with the scale, impacted him or her. If the other person holds the scale and impacts me... the relationship just reverses. However, the scale will read the same, if the impact conditions are equal. Lastly, if both of us hold scales and impact the scales by equally shoving them towards each other, we would have mutual reading and depending on which direction of observation, we would be reading either what is called inertia resistance pressure, or mass resistance pressure. Simply put... it is all just measuring pressure of bodies of matter in motion interaction. Finally, please note, if only one body is measured__ it is still the interaction of two bodies__ because the measuring instrumentation, is a body of matter. As has been said... it is all relative.
The first at rest mass measurement is basically, the mass definition of At Rest mass found in classical and modern physics books. The second measurement of mass is what I believe should be used, instead of a derivative measurement or calculation of energy. The third measurement of mass is mass, as science has related for matter in motion in vacuum space; but, I relate to the force cause, as space itself or ether within it; and this force action, as the resistance pressure, of space or ether. The reason I mention space and or ether is because, exactly how this mass gain occurs, is unknown; But we know it is a gain of mass, and at slower speeds, as I have defined, we also have a mass gain, and the first two mass measurements are of pressure, just like the directional mass of space, which is also a pressure resistance increase opposing increased acceleration. It is my belief that this brings the conditions, properties, and or abilities of matter motions all into one progressive sensible concept.
Going back to each one of these mass scenarios... All three mass measurements I related are simply measurements of pressure. All three of these mass measurements are truly something that science does and can measure. The only differences are, that I apply the same force causes, same force actions, and same directions to all three concepts... and use the same name, mass, for all three. Now I will discuss each individually to explain why science presently does things a bit differently. Science presently makes the numbers fit mathematically, but sort of scratches their head when queried about explaining some facets... I feel science is using a scenario of: if the numbers fit, and it works, it must be right, even if we don't understand it. This is learning by rote, or memorizing, instead of understanding... But, what I offer herein is mass in three, similar conditions, that all measure in the same manner; using actual real fundamentals, and properties of these fundamentals; of the Universe, which are matter, motion, and pressure. (...more on these individually later...)
Also, make special note... herein I am putting my concepts forth... which many or all of you, reading this, may disagree... but, I state emphatically__ mass is just a measurement! There are real things that happen, and we measure these, but the Universe can do quite well without the measuring of mass...
It is my belief that all the actions and constituents of the measurement of mass as I related... are due to the motions of matter in the universe, and their interactions. And since the matter of the Universe is in constant motion, with constant pressure of gravitation throughout the Universe as well as all other pressure interactions... there is always mass we can measure; as motion and pressure, of matter.
At Rest mass, the first of three mass concepts, is a bit misleading. What the scenario of At Rest means is: is that here on Earth we can have a body of matter sitting idle, at rest, unmoving as far as we are generally concerned. I presume most all adult persons, when asked, know that we, the table, and the body sitting upon the table are spinning with the Earth, while orbiting the Sun, and etc. And, a whole lot of people also now know that there are atoms, and their smaller particulates. They probably also know that this solid body, has motions of the matter going on internally all the while it is sitting there so placidly. Disregarding friction forces... if I push upon this body of matter, say a book, (not including any frictional forces); it has some resistance to my push. If it were floating in outer space it would also resist a push by some amount. Why? Well it is not magic, it is due to motion. If a body were truly solid, non-elastic, and without any internal or external motion in space... and if I pushed against it... it should move without any resistance. (Assuming space without resistance, i.e. a perfect vacuum.) However, continuing this trend of thought; if this solid body sitting in space was located in one location, but was spinning... it would knock my finger sideways when I attempt to push it. This sideways impact is just momentary pressure impact, of the motion of the body interfacing with my finger. Something spinning keeps itself in balance, and has no reason to go anywhere else, per classical Newtonian physics. And, a body with a multitude of spinning or vibrating random motions will be at a relative mean average of directions of motion that will allow it to sit naturally idle, as a whole body... like a book on a table. A few particles out of balance within the multitude of tiny particles of a body of matter will not upset the apple cart. When I push upon a book, not all of the particles within a body are going to exert return pressure upon my finger pressure action at any one instant. The matter particulate motional pressure amount that is exerted at any moment to my finger, is what we measure as at rest mass.
The standard of measure for mass, or commonly thought of as weight, is now the Kilogram. It was the gram. They didn't really change things except to make the basic unit upsized as 1000 grams. The unit of force is the Newton. It is a measurement they arrived at, or derived, by pushing (pressuring) a kilogram body quantity of matter amount, from and idle condition; one meter; in one second. The pressure measurement they exerted to accomplish this, was named a Pascal. Meaning that it was an amount of pressure, exerted spread out upon one square meter of area. All this is matter, pressure, and motion. These are all just arbitrary values that have been selected. The kilogram is one liter, which is one decimeter cubed, full of water. One meter is now the length of some light waves made by a certain matter crystal heated to emit off a particular frequency of light. There is no real significance to this except mankind would like to have something to compare all measuring to, as a standard... They would like this standard to be an un-variant, common to, and unchanging natural property of the Universe. I don't think this is going to happen in our Universe with its unique properties. The speed of light is the closest thing to a standard fixed item that we have to measure, but we cannot even measure light exactly. However, I think science knows enough now, to select light speed, and work our way downward... for deriving other measurements; rather than measuring something physical here on earth, and moving upward, using an antique concept to measure light. Light does give us distance, which can give us area, and volume. Light is in motion and gives us pressure that can lead up to mass measures. I would suggest using light speed as one (1) whole something, and go from there. (I am very much against using the energy equivalence of the measure of work done, to kick an electron in the seat of its pants; as mankind's basic measuring stick. (Planck's constant). And finally for this paragraph... some new considerations now enter the game... It appears that the speed of the neutrino particle is faster that the speed of the light photon... in a vacuum. Yummy!
For what I consider the second concept, condition, or scenario of the measure of mass; is of a body, as a whole in motion, in some direction as a whole. If I hit a baseball over the fence, for a home run, while working at playing the game of baseball... I say, we have all sorts ways to get resultant measurements; of the work done to hit the ball over the fence. I also say, that we should not say, it took some amount of energy expended, and or transferred from me to the bat, to the ball and etc. The bat is a body of matter in motion impacting the ball with pressure to accelerate it through the air. To stop the ball in mid air requires resistance pressure. Plain and simple. Exactly the same concept as measuring mass. Energy is a measurement of the activity of work, and ability of work, that it took to hit the ball over the fence, after the ball comes down. And yes, if I did exactly the same thing again... it would measure the same again, but after it alit. It was not energy that hit the ball either time! Why don't we call it what it is? It was the bat's at rest matter mass, with additional mass due to the additional motion, which exerted impact pressure. It was also the same scenario for me working swinging the bat; and if the ball did some work, when it hit the far bleachers... it would be again a repeated scenario.
The third concept is... a mass gain for matter, known by science, as it accelerates through a space vacuum. This is a known fact of life for science, and was from Einstein, if my memory serves me correctly. Einstein faced a dilemma with this mass concept; if space or ether in space was the pressure resistance that caused the pressure resistance of a body at near light speed, it doesn't fit with his theories of space. So he took an alternate choice of not giving a good explanation. Einstein's theories are based upon the concept that space has no properties. And he was very reluctant to the idea that space has an ether. In 1922 Albert Einstein's book titled Sidelights on Relativity, was published. He wrote, "According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable..." and further on, he wrote "But this ether may not be thought of with the quality characteristic of ponder-able media, as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it." I agree that a purely 3D space of a perfect vacuum, would have no attributes... But a perfect vacuum is a bit absurd. Thus there is an ether... and I believe it is the resistance pressure of the ether, that photons face, as a top end speed. I believe this ether can move... as sort of space clouds, or bubbles. I think the free space of an atom is full of idle photons. These idle photons, could move along, with matter, within the region of the atom's free space, sort of like a storage bag. Then, when the atom, needs some photons, to radiate as heat, it doesn't have to look very far. Likewise since I have this ether moving, and having abilities... this is probably why we have gravity, and are pressed to Earth. The whole Universe is under tension__ pressure. If Albert were to accept space directional mass gain of matter, as ordinary ether media... and classical physics... it would be paramount to shooting himself in the foot. And__ if the ether; moves with matter and etc... there need not be a space wind to detect. The Michelson-Morley instrument would not detect any space ether wind because it would be moving in the same frame of reference. And keeping the logic going... a movable solar space bubble with matter, and ether in motion... would explain how orbiting heavenly bodies are contained, and don't fly off into space.
mo = m / √ 1- v²/c² is the Lorentz formula Einstein used for calculating space directional mass of bodies in a vacuum. I am putting this herein... as "food for thought" item. If the speed of light is designated as just one (1)__ c² becomes 1² which is just 1__ and v would then equal some decimal fraction of light speed. (example... 1/2 light speed, whether mile per second, or kilometers per second, would just be 0.5 of 1. Thus the ratio of v² / c² , or v² : c², becomes v² / 1 or just v². Then the formula would be just 1 - v², which can be reduced to just 1 - v. Thus the algebraic formulation would be mo = m / √ 1 - v. If you enjoy math... and play with this formula a bit more... you can compute the light / velocity relationship using geometry with the Pythagorean theorem; and in trigonometry the speed of light is the radius (1), and v equals sine... and lastly these relationships fall into place along the sliding scale of expansion and contraction of the square of the distance properties of our Universe. As I have related other places... radiation such as light and gravitation do not get weaker with distance! They only spread! Bird shot fired from the muzzle of a shot gun, in a vacuum, up close to a target... makes a small pattern that includes all the pellets from the shell. If the target is moves further from the muzzle... the pattern is larger, there is still the same amount of pellets, and since in a vacuum the velocity is still the same. The only thing different is the target move further away and the pattern got larger, by a rate of one to four. Why do I keep hammering on this item? Well, people don't think in terms that the gravitation phenomena at the distance or the planets Mercury, Earth, and Pluto, is the same amount of gravitation available at each radii. This then becomes as a matter, mass, and pressure scenario. There is just the right amount of gravitation spread out in our orbit so to speak, that pressures the mass of the Earth into orbit curvature. If the Earth were closer to the Sun, it would have the gravitation more condensed, and can force the Earth into sharper corners so to speak for a smaller orbit. It would seem that the Earth would be zinging around the Sun really fast... but actually the Earth would be still going at its same forward speed; but, would be doing more revolutions per year. The inverse of this would happen if the Earth were out where Pluto orbits. The Earth would still be traveling at the same rate, but turning more gradually in a larger orbit, and only doing partial orbits per year. (Note... I excluded friction, other gravitational actions not of the Sun, and the affect of the Solar System moving through space...) This is not magic... It is the same affect that happens when an ice skater goes into a spinning condition with his or her arms out; and when the arms are drawn inward it appears the person is spinning faster, but in reality the person is just doing more revolutions per unit time. Classical Physics...
~~~~~~~~
All mass is a physical pressure measurement of resistance to any change of motion as a body of matter of atoms, a single atom, sub-atomic particles, and particles of light. All the Universe is in motion, so all matter however great, or small has motion. Thus all matter has mass, even if we cannot measure it. All motion is going in some direction, thus all mass is directional, and is the measure of pressure; resisting motion. Bodies of matter consisting of particles larger than the elementary particles of nature, have composite motions always in motion in all sorts of directions. Elementary particles are those that cannot be broken down into other particles. Also, light is thought to be a photon particle. (It is not known for sure if the photon has lesser particles, because, to date, we cannot measure smaller than a photon.)
Everyday matter we are familiar with, is made up of atoms forming elements; and molecules to make compounds. These bodies of matter are in Universal motion (planet rotations, orbits, galactic, universal expansion...), but if experimented upon here on Earth we say, bodies are in the Earth's frame of reference, and can be considered sitting still with reference (relative) to Earth. These bodies when sitting still have a resistance to being moved by pressure brought to bear upon them. This resistance to motion for these composite bodies of matter has been named "inertia". The measurement of the pressure resisting the inertia pressure has been named the "At Rest" mass.
Space fills our Universe. Light is present throughout our universe. The Top Speed of Light is our best existing standard of any measure. If light could go from our Universe to another universe with different Space resistance... it may go faster or slower. If Space at the very edges of our expanding Universe is less dense... light will probably go faster; but I don't think we have any way to measure this. Thus Space causes light to have a 'Terminal Space Speed'. Much like air has a 'Terminal Air Speed' for falling bodies. (For Jonathan Livingston Seagull, terminal air speed in a dive was about 214 mph.)
* * * *
When we press against a body we are only working against some of the sub-atomic particles in possible orbital motion, and other modest atomic activity motions pointed in the direction of the external pressure force action we initiated, that are not in a null; and the distortion we are trying to initiate into the skeleton system that links the atoms together. This skeleton system that holds matter in matter forms, is what I think may resist changing its state. Most of the body's atom motions are balanced out with about half of the sub-atomic particles going in opposing directions. Thus, it would be, that there would be close to a balance; that would cancel, and we would have no opposition to our pressure, for most of the total true mass available. This balance in all spherical directions is what makes a solid body sit still, in our frame of reference. The inertia of a body at rest, is the resistance the body offers due to any pressure trying to distort its natural skeleton atomic framework.
So now what? Well, we probably don't ever touch our electrons directly to the electrons of another body. The pressure may be our charged fields interacting with other fields. An analogy might be as: Imagine a body made of a structure of many spinning gyroscopes. These gyros all are connected together with their spinning gyro axis axles by flexible joints. If you remember, gyroscopes can be moved easily in any direction as long as we keep flat with the plane of the spinning wheel, or perpendicular to it. But, if we tilt a gyro, by pressuring the axis...it opposes, or resists this pressure we apply. In a situation of gad-zillions of little gyros spinning and headed in all directions, and tilted in multitudes of directions. There is always going to be some average mean amount of resistance to the attempted tilting that is going to occur from any external pressure trying to upset the apple cart. This may well be what is what we measure as inertia pressure resistance. I believe this physical type of device, as a body, of matter could be constructed for experimentation.
Note also, this opposing non-tilting opposition inertia, would increase if the spinning increased; thus it would be like more thermal activity. This inertia would also increase if each gyroscope had additional spinning wheels; or larger wheels, essentially increasing its mass, which we commonly relate to, as weight...
Einstein was able to make a relationship between the measure of the resistance, inertia, of a body of matter to change of state, plus its directional mass; __ compared to the maximum ability of measured work a body of matter is capable. This is his E = mc² equivalence formula. I have a little difficulty with this formula... yes it balances... but... Einstein's E makes energy a thing, an entity, which in reality does not exist. There is the entity matter whatever it is, for m, and there is the entity light. E is the total amount of work ability that a body of some mass measurement could do if its total capacities we utilized. If this work was measured or calculated it would equal E... but mathematical values equaling E, do not make E into matter, in a different form. The different form of matter at light speed is matter as photons, each with individual forward directional mass, that is equal to all the individual constituents of the atoms in the body of matter mentioned when they are accelerated to light speed, and considering that they have idle photons in the space of the atoms that are also accelerated... the mass then at near light speed prior to form conversion matches E, or better said maybe L for lambda, for total photon directional mass of the resultant change of matter body form to matter light form.
A bit more on the atom. It would seem to me if you took into consideration every particle within an atom, including the atom's Space volume's idle particles (and or virtual Particles), of a body of matter__ these would be the constituents within matter that are converted to directional matter at the speed of light. In a normal state a body has most of its atomic motions balanced out, or at a null, thus the total mass, if in one direction, is not recognized. At the speed of light any and all matter is moving in one direction together, and only in one direction! Electrons are not orbiting. Protons are not wiggling. There is no shifting. Every little tit-bit is moving straight ahead, and at the instant just prior to the speed of light... they are all accelerated to their maximum impact pressure level, including idle or virtual particles, all with increased directional only, mass, in one direction. If this accumulated single direction pressure were measured just prior to the matter to light conversion... it would be a good possibility that it would equal the summation of the multi directional photons directional mass, created after the matter to light conversion. At the instant just prior to matter to light conversion... with all the atomics particulates moving in only one common direction... they are essentially idle mass-less particles if pressed from perpendicular. If they could be caught up with, (unlikely... because it would be going faster that light) they would have almost infinite minus mass from the aft direction. Thus a body at almost light speed would have a terrific phenomenal extremely gargantuan differential of pressure across itself! Its not difficult to imagine why it goes bang!
We know that light has directional mass. All matter when just below the speed of light has directional mass. This is because it has all been focused, and can't wiggle, orbit and move in any other direction. There would be no at rest mass. And, at speeds near light speeds there should be a reduction in perpendicular at rest mass as measured within a moving parallel frame of reference. The motions within the atomic levels probably would become erratic, and or sluggish. Possibly why, the faster we go, the slower we age?!
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Directional Forward Mass........... + mf = mo / + [ √ ( 1- v² / c² ) ]
Directional Reverse Mass............ - mr = mo / - [ √ (1 - v² / c² ) ]
Please note that by Reverse Mass, I expressly mean a reduction of the measure of mass of a body from whence it came! There is no direction to the measurement mass. Forward and Reverse are descriptive words of the motion of a body, Not the direction of a measurement of mass!
Please note here: I continually refer to the above formulae as Lorentz's. The configuration of the mathematical formula came from Lorentz. Using this formula for calculating measure of mass is a product of Einstein. What Einstein did here was awesome, but if I mention Einstein's formula... people usually mentally jump to his other more famous equation. However this formula may be just as important, or more than his most famous one. But I think the implications of directional mass were not fully realized by Albert. As I said before, for Space to offer resistance to bodies, including light, would not bode well with his theories.
It seems a bit silly to have reverse mass. This does, however, make everybody happy with what they call the Conservation of mass, or Conservation of momentum. But, you probably will admit, the further away a body goes, the less chance of impacting yourself in a given time. But, that is not why I went through this exercise of reasoning... We know that behind a racing car there is a reduced pressure region. There is a lot we don't know about Space. But, we have pretty well established that light is curved as it passes large bodies of matter. (I go with the thought that Space is curved, or warped in some manner, and light follows this curvature. I do not think gravitational radiation, if such a thing, directly affects light.) So, there may be a distortion in Space in front of a moving body, as well as distortion behind?! Might this be observable? I don't know, but if so, we would gain a bit more knowledge of Space. There is the Cerenkov Effect of a light cone preceding accelerated particles when going through a medium that allows the particle to move through the medium faster than light through the same media. Maybe there is an effect on light in the wake of a high velocity particle? And__ it might even be that we only travel through Space of our own, possibly as a solar system Space bubble, giving us a solar system frame of reference including Space that moves with us. This would or could, also go further to have other Space envelope frame of references; as for other bodies as stars, and galaxies.
~~~~~~~~
Again note... I have mass in this, my section of writings as non-reality. The Universe can and could do without the measurement mass, and the word mass; and still function normally. Do not get confused with the actions of bodies of matter. Matter would still move, and run into resistance and etc. It is just not a must, that matter gets its matter measured as mass... and, all daylong, that is what matter is doing without. Mass goes into the fantasy bucket.
* * * *
Page Relevant Quotes
"Moreover mass is not merely 'heaviness' but resistance to change in motion. Einstein's equation giving the increase of mass with velocity is similar in form to the other equations of Relativity but vastly more important in its consequences:
m = mo / √ 1-v²/c²
The Universe and Dr. Einstein; by Lincoln Barnett
"In its popular sense, mass, is just another word for weight. But as used by the physicist, it denotes a rather different and more fundamental property of matter: namely, resistance to a change of motion." Primer on Quantum theory of the Atom, by Stephen k. Lower.
Mass: "A measure of a body's inertia, i.e. its resistance to acceleration." Fm: A Concise Dictionary of Physics.
"As the velocity of a particle approaches the velocity of light, the mass increases (the restricted theory of relativity) so that
m = mo / √(1-v²/c²)
where mo is the mass for zero velocity (rest mass); v is the velocity of the particle, and c is the velocity of light" Encyclopedic Dictionary of Electronics and Nuclear Engineering, by Robert I. Sarbacher, Sc.D.
"The Cerenkov Effect." "The relativity of mass places a limit on the speed that a body can have relative to an observer. As the body's speed v approaches the speed of light c, the ratio v²/c² approaches 1 and the quantity √1-v²/c² approaches 0. Hence the mass m of a body given by m = mo / √(1-v²/c²) approaches infinity as v approaches c. The relative speed v therefore must be less than c. An infinite force would be needed to accelerate a body to a speed at which its mass is infinite, and there are neither infinite forces nor infinite masses in the universe.
The speed of light c in special relativity is the speed of light in free space, 3 x 108 m/sec. in all material media, such as water, glass, or air, visible light travels more slowly than this, and atomic particles are capable of moving with higher speeds in such a media than the speed of light in them though never faster than the speed of light in free space. When an electrically charged particle moves through a substance at a speed exceeding that of light in the substance, a cone of light waves is emitted in a process roughly similar to that in which a ship produces a bow wave as it moves through the water at a speed greater than that of water waves. These light waves are known as Cerenkov radiation." Fundamentals of Physical Science; Krauskopf & Beiser
"By the formula given by Einstein for the equivalence, the complete destruction of 1 lb of mass would be accompanied by the release of 10.66 billion kwhr of energy." Encyclopedic Dictionary of Electronics and Nuclear Engineering, by Robert I. Sarbacher, Sc.D. (Nope! There is release of light, not energy RAD)
"We should note... ...in the special case in which the force F is perpendicular to the v, as in the deflection of a high-speed particle by a magnetic field, neither the speed nor the mass changes... " Principles of College Physics: George Shortley & Dudley Williams (Important... RAD)
"At Rest Mass: ""Post an observer on a moving body and he will find a standard value, the "rest mass," identical for every electron, the same for every proton, standard for every pint of water, etc."" Fm: Physics For The Inquiring Mind, by Eric M. Rogers (This not true for light photons that only have directional mass, and it also may not be true for individual quarks of matter... RAD)
"The only particle that can move at the velocity of light is the photon itself, due to its zero rest mass." Primer on Quantum theory of the Atom, by Stephen k. Lower. (There is a good chance that individual quarks fall into this category... RAD)
"...laws of motion... The story began with Galileo... Of all his discoveries, the greatest was that a body upon which no outside force is acting will continue in its state of motion; if it is at rest, it will remain at rest, but it will maintain any velocity that it originally has. This is the principal of inertia, the first of the great principles of physics of which the general statement was probably given by his contemporary Rene′ Descartes." Quanta: J. Andrade e Silva, G. Lochak (Note this was Galileo... not Newton... RAD)
"...Aristotle had believed that a force is necessary to maintain continuous motion." Quanta: J. Andrade e Silva, G. Lochak (RAD ...it actually works out that Aristotle was right... if my theories are correct...)
"Newton concluded that the acceleration given to a body by any particular force will be independent of the form, dimensions, and constitution of the body; it will depend entirely upon the amount of matter that the body contains__ in other words, its mass. The fundamental law of dynamics is:
F = mv
where m is the mass of the moving body, F the force acting on it, and γ the acceleration produced. This law shows quite clearly that the only property of the body which is relevant to the study of motion is the mass." Quanta: J. Andrade e Silva, G. Lochak (Instead of..."in other words, its mass" it should say: in other words, its measure of mass! rad)
"In mechanical terms, a body is subject to acceleration if the amount of ground covered in unit time is changing (either increasing, so that the body is accelerating in the usual sense of the word, or else decreasing, so that the body is decelerating or slowing down). The body is also said to be undergoing acceleration if its direction of motion is changing, even if its actual velocity along its trajectory is not." Quanta: J. Andrade e Silva, G. Lochak
"The important fact about mass is that it is a measure of resistance to a change of motion, a property usually called inertia." The world of Elementary Particles, Kenneth W. Ford
"That mass is one of the forms of energy was first realized at the beginning of this century. The energy of mass and the energy of motion are the two forms of energy which dominate the elementary-particle world. Mass energy can be thought of as the 'energy of being,' matter possessing energy just by virtue of existing. A material particle is nothing more than a highly concentrated and localized bundle of energy. The amount of concentrated energy for a motionless particle is proportional to its mass. If the particle is moving it has still more energy, its kinetic energy. A mass-less particle such as a photon has only energy of motion (kinetic energy) and no energy of being (mass)." The world of Elementary Particles, Kenneth W. Ford. (RAD... more motion, mass, work... energy is measured later...) "That mass is one of the forms of energy..." Bah! Bad! rad. Matter "matter possessing energy by virtue of existing" ? As far as I know, it is difficult to have different forms of: work being done... energy measurement. And, without man, energy doesn't exist!
See how skewed mass and energy can be; varying from just measurements!?