New Laws of Physics

[Guadalupe]

I like to introduce my two new laws of physics for review. This law’s of mine are from years of research.

 

Below are my two new laws of physics I call: “Law of Time, Energy And Motion” and “Law of Origin”.

 

Law of Time, Energy And Motion states:

 

Time, records the beginning and the end of any and all historical events, regardless of its insignificance. Energy, used to cause an explosion which sets a body into motion. Motion, caused by the force from the strength, of the explosion, when energy is applied.

 

Law of Origin states:

 

1. “A body set in motion, from a point of origin, will come to rest”.

 

2. “A body can not be in motion without a point of origin”.

 

3. “A body can not come to rest without a point of origin”.

 

4. “A body can not exist without a point of origin”.

 

Any and all comments are welcome for review.

 

:shrug:

[arkain101]

1. “A body set in motion, from a point of origin, will come to rest”.

 

I agree with the logic of this law but would better describe it as. "A body set in motion, from a point of origin, will come to merge to the source of the greatest force in its path of motion.

 

Another law of motion I have agreed with that id like to add;

All moving objects are responsible for duality results, and can complete two goals at the same time. In one path from a point of origin to a point of destination is equally the path from destination to point of origin.

 

In concept, A Car travels from point A to B, passenger C gets paid 1$ every foot he leaves from point A and passenger D gets paid 1$ every foot he gets closer to B. The car does one job and both extends point of origin while decreasing point of destination.

For example; An elevator Carries people to the top of the building, in one path it creates potential energy for a passenger to skydive back to their point of origin without use of energy and deliver a package to the top At the same time. Elevator does two jobs in one. KE is always equal to the square of the velocity. A moving object can do work with that of which interacts with and on itself at the same time.

[coldcreation]

I like to introduce my two new laws of physics for review. This law’s of mine are from years of research.

 

Below are my two new laws of physics I call: “Law of Time, Energy And Motion” and “Law of Origin”.

 

Law of Time, Energy And Motion states:

 

Time, records the beginning and the end of any and all historical events, regardless of its insignificance. Energy, used to cause an explosion which sets a body into motion. Motion, caused by the force from the strength, of the explosion, when energy is applied.:

 

Seems these are initial conditions: a beginning, an end, an explosion, energy.

 

Questions: what began, how does it end, where did the energy come from that leads to an explosion.

 

Withiut answers to hese questions laws are of no valuable use, unless there are applications to be drawn from them, but I see none. Are there any?

 

A body set in motion will never come to rest unless otherwise disturbed.

 

What is the point of origin from which motion can be set? Where was the object before, how had it managed to remain motionless in universe of constant change?

Number three law is irrelevent. It's a Mobius strip concept, a vicious circle.

Four is stikes me as being created by an intelligent designer, i.e., the body was created at t = 0. Before that, only He existed. Is that right?

 

 

 

Law of Origin states:

 

1. “A body set in motion, from a point of origin, will come to rest”.

 

2. “A body can not be in motion without a point of origin”.

 

3. “A body can not come to rest without a point of origin”.

 

4. “A body can not exist without a point of origin”.

 

Any and all comments are welcome for review.

 

:shrug:

[Tormod]

I agree with cc here in that point 4 seems to imply a designer of sorts.

 

I also think point 3 is a tautology - if #2 states that a body cannot come to rest without an origin, it would make more sense if #3 said that "a body cannot come to rest without having moved".

 

I must admit I find it difficult to accept that anything can "come to rest" in our universe - I am too much a fan of relativity to think so. :shrug:

[Boerseun]

Why, exactly, would a body come to rest?

 

If there's no external influences on a body (ala Newton), it'll just keep on floating in what it'll perceive as a straight line.

[Guadalupe]

Why, exactly, would a body come to rest?

 

Because, it got tired. Just kidding :)

 

Kidding aside, let me shed some light, to this two new Laws.

 

I'll start with the Law of Time, Energy And Motion.

 

When setting a body into motion, time is always present in the beginning and at the end when the body comes to rest. It also applies to all bodies at rest.

 

Example: Time of birth. Time of death. Everything else, in between birth and death, is relevant.

 

Time is always present when energy is applied to put things into motion and time is always there when it comes to rest.

 

Example: The beginning of a race and the end of the race. The beginning of a game and the end of the game. The starting point and the finish line. etc.

 

Energy, the external force, is always needed, when putting all things in motion. All things not in motion, are at rest, until Energy, is applied.

 

 

:)

[Guadalupe]

Now, the Law of Origin.

 

The Law of Origin, is about how all things have a beginning and all things have an end. (period).

 

Everything and everyone, came from somewhere or someone. That is the point of origin that I'm taking about.

 

The Big Bang is considered the point of origin of the birth of the Universe. All things without birth, creation, manufacture, etc, can not exist. To be in existence, means that there was a point of origin.

 

Examples: Children come from parents. Plants life come from seeds. Automobiles come from manufactures. The Universe came from the Big Bang.

 

I would guess, one could ask, themselves, as to how far is one willing to go to find the beginning, the point of origin, in order to find the answers, where someone, or something came from.

 

When we give something or someone a beginning, we automatically give it an end.

 

:)

[arkain101]

And end? or another change of state.

[kamil]

 

1. “A body set in motion, from a point of origin, will come to rest”.

 

 

:)

 

It doesnt have to come to rest, in fact, if no external forces are added then it cant come to rest.

 

When we give something or someone a beginning, we automatically give it an end.

 

;)

 

But why? where did that law come from?

Like I previously said, only if external forces are added then the body will change its state of motion(or anything). And no forces bieng added on to a body is perfectly imaginable.

[jettlarue]

as long as there is another particle in the universe it will definately stop

[coldcreation]

as long as there is another particle in the universe it will definately stop

 

not

[jettlarue]

why wouldnt it. eventually the two particles gravity will bring them closer til they stop. but give an explanation cold creation because not is a bad answer.

[infamous]

why wouldnt it. eventually the two particles gravity will bring them closer til they stop. but give an explanation cold creation because not is a bad answer.

I would suggest that "not" is only a short answer jettlarue and not necessarily a bad answer.

[jettlarue]

can someone explain to me then

[Erasmus00]

can someone explain to me then

 

If the particle isn't traveling straight at the other one, it will have what physicists call angular momentum. This is a fancy way of saying it will try to move towards the other particle, but it will miss, and it will keep falling, and keep missing. This will result in an orbit that is elliptical.

-Will

[arkain101]

and even though the particles considerable total mass may appear to be at rest, aka zero energy, it is in fact a state of neverending motion of quanta(?).

 

As if to say earth has no kentic energy as a whole in order to create energy, when in fact it is only a compilation of many parts of energy.

[Guadalupe]

Hi! Tormod. :)

 

I agree with cc here in that point 4 seems to imply a designer of sorts.

 

I also think point 3 is a tautology - if #2 states that a body cannot come to rest without an origin, it would make more sense if #3 said that "a body cannot come to rest without having moved".

 

I must admit I find it difficult to accept that anything can "come to rest" in our universe - I am too much a fan of relativity to think so. :lol:

 

 

I e-mail several places and I received an answer from NASA. And I quote, “The resulting observation is that all moving objects slow down and stop through some form of “friction”.”

 

I'm running out of coffee. Time for me to make a fresh new pot of coffee.

 

:)