brisbane inertial mass gravitational mass

Darwin production values

intro earth year

Italy Galileos lifting force required

Gold coast undoing newton's first law

Greenland me talking undoing NLG aristotle also

longeath year earth year

melbournef me talking saying poliicians rofesspr

Montana structure of F = M.m/d2

nevis definition of weight

osj earth year moving sun

St kitts expanding circle inverse square law

St lucia expanding circle inverse square law

Tanzania conservation of momentum nfl

Tuvalu inner planet a 1/4 orbit post transit

Uluru aristotle last will and testament

vermont men on moon mutual gravitation increase

Wyoming Structure of F = M.m/d2

Vaduz high tide calculation

Darwin production values

intro earth year

Italy Galileos lifting force required

Gold coast undoing newton's first law

Greenland me talking undoing NLG aristotle also

longeath year earth year

melbournef me talking saying poliicians rofesspr

Montana structure of F = M.m/d2

nevis definition of weight

osj earth year moving sun

St kitts expanding circle inverse square law

St lucia expanding circle inverse square law

Tanzania conservation of momentum nfl

Tuvalu inner planet a 1/4 orbit post transit

Uluru aristotle last will and testament

vermont men on moon mutual gravitation increase

Wyoming Structure of F = M.m/d2

Vaduz high tide calculation

The email represents a higher scholarship acknowledgement that we may be indulging in an untrue relationship with the universe we are part. That untrue

You have to wonder how man walked on the moon, developed nuclear energy, etc. The foundation of Einstein's general theory of relativity is legitimately stupid.

Since the B.C. period the explanation of motion has been a much ado about nothing. Aristotle's basic idea was motion requires an external cause, a push or a pull, to continue. Without such, an Aristotelian motion deteriorates to a motionlessness. Aristotle wasn’t understanding that the slowing of the motions he was observing was caused by effect of external influences.

Possibly earlier by others, definitely some sixteen hundred years later a solution to this dilemma began to be found. A Frenchman by the name of Jean Buridan began an understanding of what we call momentum today. He described a body having an impetus to continue moving once set moving. Sixteen hundred years beyond the life of Aristotle, this supposition was there to move science past the false teachings of a B.C. personality.

Momentum is the product of mass of a body and its velocity. The greater the value of either, the greater the momentum value of the body under consideration. Momentum = mass x velocity. That is the momentum formula.

Known but not much scientifically stated, momentum is self conserving. Mathematically this is a truth. Any two numbers, including ones representing mass and velocity, multiplied together produce a single unalterable answer. The measurable phenomena of the combined momentum of two bodies before and after a collision being equal proves the conservation of the momentum of each body before and after the collision. The conservation of momentum is a well established phenomena.

If that foundation block of mathematical physics had been understood and accepted by scholarship prior to the Copernican revolution, then scholarship would have been ready to see that resistance to a change of momentum is a Newton third law force. As in Newton's first law, the Copernican revolution decided the resistance was present in mass whether or not an external force was applied. What is missing from the Copernican revolution understanding is an acceleration in one direction causes the accelerated body to be measurably weighted in the opposite direction to the acceleration. That resistance to acceleration is the equal and opposite force to the force that caused the acceleration.

Beyond clearly stating resistance to a change of state of motion is as spontaneously born as any other Newton third law force and is not a quality inherent of matter, only hard scholastic work is needed to conclude the motion saga began by Aristotle began over 2000 years ago.

Since the B.C. period the explanation of motion has been a much ado about nothing. Aristotle's basic idea was motion requires an external cause, a push or a pull, to continue. Without such, an Aristotelian motion deteriorates to a motionlessness. Aristotle wasn’t understanding that the slowing of the motions he was observing was caused by effect of external influences.

Possibly earlier by others, definitely some sixteen hundred years later a solution to this dilemma began to be found. A Frenchman by the name of Jean Buridan began an understanding of what we call momentum today. He described a body having an impetus to continue moving once set moving. Sixteen hundred years beyond the life of Aristotle, this supposition was there to move science past the false teachings of a B.C. personality.

Momentum is the product of mass of a body and its velocity. The greater the value of either, the greater the momentum value of the body under consideration. Momentum = mass x velocity. That is the momentum formula.

Known but not much scientifically stated, momentum is self conserving. Mathematically this is a truth. Any two numbers, including ones representing mass and velocity, multiplied together produce a single unalterable answer. The measurable phenomena of the combined momentum of two bodies before and after a collision being equal proves the conservation of the momentum of each body before and after the collision. The conservation of momentum is a well established phenomena.

If that foundation block of mathematical physics had been understood and accepted by scholarship prior to the Copernican revolution, then scholarship would have been ready to see that resistance to a change of momentum is a Newton third law force. As in Newton's first law, the Copernican revolution decided the resistance was present in mass whether or not an external force was applied. What is missing from the Copernican revolution understanding is an acceleration in one direction causes the accelerated body to be measurably weighted in the opposite direction to the acceleration. That resistance to acceleration is the equal and opposite force to the force that caused the acceleration.

Beyond clearly stating resistance to a change of state of motion is as spontaneously born as any other Newton third law force and is not a quality inherent of matter, only hard scholastic work is needed to conclude the motion saga began by Aristotle began over 2000 years ago.

You have to wonder how man walked on the moon, developed nuclear energy, etc. The foundation of Einstein's general theory of relativity is legitimately stupid.

Since the B.C. period the explanation of motion has been a much ado about nothing. Aristotle's basic idea was motion requires an external cause, a push or a pull, to continue. Without such, an Aristotelian motion deteriorates to a motionless state. Aristotle wasn’t understanding that the slowing of the motions he was observing was caused by external forces.

Possibly earlier by others, definitely some sixteen hundred years later a solution to this dilemma began to be found. A Frenchman by the name of Jean Buridan began an understanding of what we call momentum today. He described a body having an impetus to continue moving once set moving. Sixteen hundred years beyond the life of Aristotle, this supposition was there to move scholarship past the false teachings of a B.C. personality.

Momentum is a combination of the mass of a body and its velocity. The greater the value of either, the greater the momentum value of the body under consideration. Momentum = mass x velocity. That is the momentum formula.

Known but not scholastically stated, momentum is self conserving. Mathematically this is an obvious truth. Any two numbers, including ones representing mass and velocity, multiplied together equal a single unalterable answer. The measurable phenomena of the combined momentum of two bodies before and after a collision being equal proves the conservation of the momentum of each body before and after the collision. The conservation of momentum is a well established phenomena.

If that foundation block of mathematical physics had been understood and accepted by scholarship prior to the Copernican revolution, then scholarship would have been ready to see that resistance to a change of momentum is a Newton third law force. As in Newton's first law, the Copernican revolution decided the resistance was present in mass whether or not an external force was applied. What is missing from the Copernican revolution understanding is an acceleration in one direction causes the accelerated body to be measurably weighted in the opposite direction to the acceleration. That resistance to acceleration is the equal and opposite force to the force that caused the acceleration.

Beyond clearly stating resistance to a change of state of motion is as spontaneously born as any other Newton third law force and is not a quality inherent of matter, only hard scholastic work is needed to conclude the motion saga began by Aristotle began over 2000 years ago.

Since the B.C. period the explanation of motion has been a much ado about nothing. Aristotle's basic idea was motion requires an external cause, a push or a pull, to continue. Without such, an Aristotelian motion deteriorates to a motionless state. Aristotle wasn’t understanding that the slowing of the motions he was observing was caused by external forces.

Possibly earlier by others, definitely some sixteen hundred years later a solution to this dilemma began to be found. A Frenchman by the name of Jean Buridan began an understanding of what we call momentum today. He described a body having an impetus to continue moving once set moving. Sixteen hundred years beyond the life of Aristotle, this supposition was there to move scholarship past the false teachings of a B.C. personality.

Momentum is a combination of the mass of a body and its velocity. The greater the value of either, the greater the momentum value of the body under consideration. Momentum = mass x velocity. That is the momentum formula.

Known but not scholastically stated, momentum is self conserving. Mathematically this is an obvious truth. Any two numbers, including ones representing mass and velocity, multiplied together equal a single unalterable answer. The measurable phenomena of the combined momentum of two bodies before and after a collision being equal proves the conservation of the momentum of each body before and after the collision. The conservation of momentum is a well established phenomena.

If that foundation block of mathematical physics had been understood and accepted by scholarship prior to the Copernican revolution, then scholarship would have been ready to see that resistance to a change of momentum is a Newton third law force. As in Newton's first law, the Copernican revolution decided the resistance was present in mass whether or not an external force was applied. What is missing from the Copernican revolution understanding is an acceleration in one direction causes the accelerated body to be measurably weighted in the opposite direction to the acceleration. That resistance to acceleration is the equal and opposite force to the force that caused the acceleration.

Beyond clearly stating resistance to a change of state of motion is as spontaneously born as any other Newton third law force and is not a quality inherent of matter, only hard scholastic work is needed to conclude the motion saga began by Aristotle began over 2000 years ago.

Rule 1 We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances.

Sir Isaac Newton's first rule of scientific reasoning. Mathematical aficionados, scholars and common sense people accepting the rule with application preparedness and Newton's first law of motion in full view, the result should be a fresh breath of worldly common sense. The law is not a pre requisite for landing a man on the moon, splitting the atom or cleaning up after a bog. It’s an indictment on every civilised desire there has ever been.

Newton's first law of motion. An object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction UNLESS acted upon by an unbalanced force.

For better or worse, pass marks generationally maintain what scholastic truth is. Once one generation is ticked off, that generation parlays its tick it the next generation and so.

As a language construct Newton's motion law words are truth. As a stand alone law of physics they are a lie in conflict with Newton's first rule of scientific reasoning.

The necessity of an exception to make a language construct a truth divides this Newtonian construct into two parts. An actual a law of physics and then a consideration of a second law of physics. The actual law of physics is the result of the product of a mass magnitude and the velocity magnitude of that mass is uniform momentum. That law of physics was finding its feet before the Copernican revolution. The exception consideration is what happens when an external or Newton second law force is applied to uniform momentum. During classroom settings, societal pass mark desire of students assimilates the law of uniform momentum and the consideration of what happens when an external force is applied to uniform momentum into a word not contained within the law but said to be the overarching explanation of the law. That word being one introduced into scholarship at the time of the introduction of the Copernican revolution into scholarship to get past a troublesome 2,000 year old Aristotelian view of motion and to explain why the earth is suspended above the sun. That word being inertia.

What is stated in Newton's first law prior to UNLESS is perfectly explained (sufficiently with respect of Newton's first rule of scientific reasoning) by the product of mass and velocity. In true mathematical physics, the product of mass and velocity being a constant is the reason momentum is conserved both prior to and after a collision.

What follows UNLESS is structurally disallowed from being relevant to the substantive reason of uniform momentum/the conservation of momentum. Only comes into effect if an external force is applied to state of uniform momentum.

Within the totality of the law without being mentioned is the belief that an inertial force of resistance to the change of a state of uniform momentum resides with matter.

During the Copernican revolution this force hashe other half of the foundation of general relativity is gravitational mass. Mass does cause an observable acceleration towards its self.

Not force as the Copernican revolution scholastically intones. Sir Isaac was perplexed about there could such a phenomena as force at a distance. His dilemma was really how could there be such a thing as acceleration at a distance. Through strange and contorted circumstances, Albert Einstein made a slight advancement in this area. He saw space and time as the medium between massive body like the earth and an acceleration towards the earth. Space the obvious medium that causes the acceleration. The relationship between space and a spherical massive body in space is a sphere of increasing size around the mass. The curved surface area of a sphere around such a mass increases in size as a square of the distance moved away from the mass. This increase in size of the curved surface area is coincidental with the decrease in rate of fall towards the mass. The beginning point to understand acceleration through space towards mass is a consideration of how the presence of a mass in space affected space in such a way. Einstein did make a start in this area. Time would not be part of the consideration though. Einstein was seeing time in the vein of a fourth dimension and what makes a clock function or causes the ageing process. Time is just an agreed method of counting cycles. Without intelligence time becomes meaningless. No one is counting.

and today is what is needed to correct another motion idea that gained scholastic currency some three hundred years after the life of this Frenchman. That idea is that uniform momentum has an origin inherent of a moving body. Any two numbers multiplied together give one answer and one answer alone. Momentum by its very product union of two numbers is uniform motion. If this wasn't so the momentum before and after the collision of two free moving bodies would not be conserved. Uniform motion is simply the conservation of the momentum of any body not subject to any external influence. The momentum is not internally acquired or internally maintained. It is externally acquired through a Newton third law force and is maintained by the nature of the combination of mass and velocity. Not by some quasi force that emanates from the interior of matter as scholarship came to accept during the Copernican revolution.

The Italian astronomer, Galileo Galilei is the one whose name is attributed to the uniform motion being a quality inherent of matter. He called the quality inertia. He stated mass or matter not subject to an external force has an unalterable velocity. This was correct. The problem was Galileo devised a non mathematical and incoherent physical explanation of this phenomena. He used a word to explain unchanging motion.

That word Galileo employed is inertia. Inert means lacking the strength or ability to move. It may be appropriate word to use to enter into scientific reasoning of why a stationary object remains stationary. By its own definition, it falls short of being an appropriate word to use to enter into scientific reasoning that explains the changing location of any motion. Something inert does not move. The motion science that Galileo began is matter has a quality within that disallows motion. Bring in Newton r 1

To make his science sensible, the inert concept is applied not to motion. But to a change of a rate of motion. It is thus said that mass works to make the acceleration of

The dimensions of velocity are distance and time, Velocity is defined as the the distance an object travels per unit time. from changing. In lieu of a Frenchman by the name of Jean Buriand had begun the required movement away from Aristotle with a quality he called impetus but by today we call momentum. Momentum is defined as the product of the mass of a body and its velocity. If we are to believe in mathematics, that is perfect the solution to why motion is constant unless it is subject to an external force. When two numbers are multiplied together you get one answer and one answer alone. because of its inertia. Beyond being an innate quality of matter, physics has never been able to explain how inertia works and has neveer resolved the problem of mass being a scalar quanity and not a vector quanity.

This is Aristotle had been doubted for a few centuries. Galileo was able to swing scholarship his way with his involvement with the observation of the earth being a planet in motion around the sun. Previously the earth had been believed to be fixed in the centre of the universe. Galileo overplayed his hand though. Or was tragically intimidated by the year on year hold Aristotle had had on scholarship. You can only imagine his grip was Einstein by ten. Anyway he introduced sleight of hand physics that Sir Isaac Newton was to make an art form out of one hundred years later. His cheating explanation of planetary motion required a consideration of where the earth would go if the sun’s gravity didn’t exist. By now you can say these guys got up to too many thought experiments and lost their functioning minds in the ether of the universe. But using the absence of something that always exists in plain unscientific. Stupid. descent of mass towards other mass. From these guess ins theories of equality between the guess ins sprung into academic action. Then the theories are noticed or connived to fit with celestial observations. Then the champagne. The universe has been conquered and the answer was 1 = 1. The right answer is likely to be geometrical with a touch of mathematics. Circumference/Diameter = 3.1459……. Is likely to be the answer to all of time space and matter. That won’t mean much until we examine whether or not 1 = 1 is a meaningful path to academic champagne.

One of the qualities attributed to matter is a force that maintains and resist change to a state of motion. This quality is scholastically downgraded from force to the word inertia during uniform motion and upgraded to force when an external force is applied to a state of motion. Whether seen The largess of the mistake scholarship has here is teaching that this quality is inherent of matter. This is mathematically unneeded and also in conflict with Newton’s third law.

The most use Sir Isaac Newton is to sorting

The correct answer to persistence is a word in most vocabularys. Momentum.simply the conservation of momentum. Not an inherent quality of mass quaintly referred to as its inertia. The correct answer to resistance to a change of state of momentum is the equal and opposite force to the force causing the change.

The problem began with Aristotle in the B.C. period. He had the persistence of a state of motion down as the continuous application of an external force with a few

The foundation is an equivalence between an apple and the same apple. The planet may not have much of a future anyway. Definitely limiting itself when intelligent animals cult away with the doorway to understanding the universe is as intellectually as pathetic as a door know equaling itself.

To get on top of the stupidity, we have to go back about two and half thousand years. To Aristotle. First a rudimentary lesson in science for anyone who has passed a physics exam that dealt with mass types. If you measure the mass of an apple using two different methods and get the same result each time, you don’t have proof that the apple coexists in the two forms that only a genius can understand. Your main evidence is both of your measuring methods are scientifically sound. If you are to be a good scientist you have to find more sound proof that mas exists in two forms that are the same. Otherwise your conclusion should be there may only be the mass type of mass and you are dealing with false or meaningless constructs.

Sir Isaac Newton's first rule of scientific reasoning. Mathematical aficionados, scholars and common sense people accepting the rule with application preparedness and Newton's first law of motion in full view, the result should be a fresh breath of worldly common sense. The law is not a pre requisite for landing a man on the moon, splitting the atom or cleaning up after a bog. It’s an indictment on every civilised desire there has ever been.

Newton's first law of motion. An object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction UNLESS acted upon by an unbalanced force.

For better or worse, pass marks generationally maintain what scholastic truth is. Once one generation is ticked off, that generation parlays its tick it the next generation and so.

As a language construct Newton's motion law words are truth. As a stand alone law of physics they are a lie in conflict with Newton's first rule of scientific reasoning.

The necessity of an exception to make a language construct a truth divides this Newtonian construct into two parts. An actual a law of physics and then a consideration of a second law of physics. The actual law of physics is the result of the product of a mass magnitude and the velocity magnitude of that mass is uniform momentum. That law of physics was finding its feet before the Copernican revolution. The exception consideration is what happens when an external or Newton second law force is applied to uniform momentum. During classroom settings, societal pass mark desire of students assimilates the law of uniform momentum and the consideration of what happens when an external force is applied to uniform momentum into a word not contained within the law but said to be the overarching explanation of the law. That word being one introduced into scholarship at the time of the introduction of the Copernican revolution into scholarship to get past a troublesome 2,000 year old Aristotelian view of motion and to explain why the earth is suspended above the sun. That word being inertia.

What is stated in Newton's first law prior to UNLESS is perfectly explained (sufficiently with respect of Newton's first rule of scientific reasoning) by the product of mass and velocity. In true mathematical physics, the product of mass and velocity being a constant is the reason momentum is conserved both prior to and after a collision.

What follows UNLESS is structurally disallowed from being relevant to the substantive reason of uniform momentum/the conservation of momentum. Only comes into effect if an external force is applied to state of uniform momentum.

Within the totality of the law without being mentioned is the belief that an inertial force of resistance to the change of a state of uniform momentum resides with matter.

During the Copernican revolution this force hashe other half of the foundation of general relativity is gravitational mass. Mass does cause an observable acceleration towards its self.

Not force as the Copernican revolution scholastically intones. Sir Isaac was perplexed about there could such a phenomena as force at a distance. His dilemma was really how could there be such a thing as acceleration at a distance. Through strange and contorted circumstances, Albert Einstein made a slight advancement in this area. He saw space and time as the medium between massive body like the earth and an acceleration towards the earth. Space the obvious medium that causes the acceleration. The relationship between space and a spherical massive body in space is a sphere of increasing size around the mass. The curved surface area of a sphere around such a mass increases in size as a square of the distance moved away from the mass. This increase in size of the curved surface area is coincidental with the decrease in rate of fall towards the mass. The beginning point to understand acceleration through space towards mass is a consideration of how the presence of a mass in space affected space in such a way. Einstein did make a start in this area. Time would not be part of the consideration though. Einstein was seeing time in the vein of a fourth dimension and what makes a clock function or causes the ageing process. Time is just an agreed method of counting cycles. Without intelligence time becomes meaningless. No one is counting.

and today is what is needed to correct another motion idea that gained scholastic currency some three hundred years after the life of this Frenchman. That idea is that uniform momentum has an origin inherent of a moving body. Any two numbers multiplied together give one answer and one answer alone. Momentum by its very product union of two numbers is uniform motion. If this wasn't so the momentum before and after the collision of two free moving bodies would not be conserved. Uniform motion is simply the conservation of the momentum of any body not subject to any external influence. The momentum is not internally acquired or internally maintained. It is externally acquired through a Newton third law force and is maintained by the nature of the combination of mass and velocity. Not by some quasi force that emanates from the interior of matter as scholarship came to accept during the Copernican revolution.

The Italian astronomer, Galileo Galilei is the one whose name is attributed to the uniform motion being a quality inherent of matter. He called the quality inertia. He stated mass or matter not subject to an external force has an unalterable velocity. This was correct. The problem was Galileo devised a non mathematical and incoherent physical explanation of this phenomena. He used a word to explain unchanging motion.

That word Galileo employed is inertia. Inert means lacking the strength or ability to move. It may be appropriate word to use to enter into scientific reasoning of why a stationary object remains stationary. By its own definition, it falls short of being an appropriate word to use to enter into scientific reasoning that explains the changing location of any motion. Something inert does not move. The motion science that Galileo began is matter has a quality within that disallows motion. Bring in Newton r 1

To make his science sensible, the inert concept is applied not to motion. But to a change of a rate of motion. It is thus said that mass works to make the acceleration of

The dimensions of velocity are distance and time, Velocity is defined as the the distance an object travels per unit time. from changing. In lieu of a Frenchman by the name of Jean Buriand had begun the required movement away from Aristotle with a quality he called impetus but by today we call momentum. Momentum is defined as the product of the mass of a body and its velocity. If we are to believe in mathematics, that is perfect the solution to why motion is constant unless it is subject to an external force. When two numbers are multiplied together you get one answer and one answer alone. because of its inertia. Beyond being an innate quality of matter, physics has never been able to explain how inertia works and has neveer resolved the problem of mass being a scalar quanity and not a vector quanity.

This is Aristotle had been doubted for a few centuries. Galileo was able to swing scholarship his way with his involvement with the observation of the earth being a planet in motion around the sun. Previously the earth had been believed to be fixed in the centre of the universe. Galileo overplayed his hand though. Or was tragically intimidated by the year on year hold Aristotle had had on scholarship. You can only imagine his grip was Einstein by ten. Anyway he introduced sleight of hand physics that Sir Isaac Newton was to make an art form out of one hundred years later. His cheating explanation of planetary motion required a consideration of where the earth would go if the sun’s gravity didn’t exist. By now you can say these guys got up to too many thought experiments and lost their functioning minds in the ether of the universe. But using the absence of something that always exists in plain unscientific. Stupid. descent of mass towards other mass. From these guess ins theories of equality between the guess ins sprung into academic action. Then the theories are noticed or connived to fit with celestial observations. Then the champagne. The universe has been conquered and the answer was 1 = 1. The right answer is likely to be geometrical with a touch of mathematics. Circumference/Diameter = 3.1459……. Is likely to be the answer to all of time space and matter. That won’t mean much until we examine whether or not 1 = 1 is a meaningful path to academic champagne.

One of the qualities attributed to matter is a force that maintains and resist change to a state of motion. This quality is scholastically downgraded from force to the word inertia during uniform motion and upgraded to force when an external force is applied to a state of motion. Whether seen The largess of the mistake scholarship has here is teaching that this quality is inherent of matter. This is mathematically unneeded and also in conflict with Newton’s third law.

The most use Sir Isaac Newton is to sorting

The correct answer to persistence is a word in most vocabularys. Momentum.simply the conservation of momentum. Not an inherent quality of mass quaintly referred to as its inertia. The correct answer to resistance to a change of state of momentum is the equal and opposite force to the force causing the change.

The problem began with Aristotle in the B.C. period. He had the persistence of a state of motion down as the continuous application of an external force with a few

The foundation is an equivalence between an apple and the same apple. The planet may not have much of a future anyway. Definitely limiting itself when intelligent animals cult away with the doorway to understanding the universe is as intellectually as pathetic as a door know equaling itself.

To get on top of the stupidity, we have to go back about two and half thousand years. To Aristotle. First a rudimentary lesson in science for anyone who has passed a physics exam that dealt with mass types. If you measure the mass of an apple using two different methods and get the same result each time, you don’t have proof that the apple coexists in the two forms that only a genius can understand. Your main evidence is both of your measuring methods are scientifically sound. If you are to be a good scientist you have to find more sound proof that mas exists in two forms that are the same. Otherwise your conclusion should be there may only be the mass type of mass and you are dealing with false or meaningless constructs.

Rule 1 We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances.

Sir Isaac Newton's first rule of scientific reasoning. Mathematical aficionados and other scholars accepting the rule with preparedness to apply to Newton's first law of motion, the result should be humanity getting a fresh start.

Newton's first law of motion. An object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction UNLESS acted upon by an unbalanced force.

Pass marks generationally maintain what scholastic truth is. Once one generation is ticked off, that generation parlays it the next and so.

As a language construct Newton's motion law words are truth. As a stand alone law of physics they are a lie in conflict with Newton's first rule of scientific reasoning.

The necessity of an exception to make a language construct a truth divides this Newtonian construct into two parts. An actual a law of physics and then a consideration of a second law of physics. The actual law of physics is the result of the product of a mass magnitude and the velocity magnitude of that mass is uniform momentum. That law of physics was finding its feet before the Copernican revolution. The exception consideration is what happens when an external or Newton second law force is applied to uniform momentum. Societal pass mark desire of students assimilates the law of uniform momentum and the consideration of what happens when an external force is applied to uniform momentum into a word not contained within the law but said to be the overarching explanation of the law. That word being one introduced into scholarship at the time of the introduction of the Copernican revolution into scholarship to get past a troublesome 2,000 year old Aristotelian view of motion and to explain why the earth is suspended above the sun. That word being inertia.

What is stated in Newton's first law prior to UNLESS is perfectly explained (sufficiently with respect of Newton's first rule of scientific reasoning) by the product of mass and velocity. Scientifically, the product of mass and velocity being a constant is the reason momentum is conserved both prior to and after a collision.

Sir Isaac Newton's first rule of scientific reasoning. Mathematical aficionados and other scholars accepting the rule with preparedness to apply to Newton's first law of motion, the result should be humanity getting a fresh start.

Newton's first law of motion. An object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction UNLESS acted upon by an unbalanced force.

Pass marks generationally maintain what scholastic truth is. Once one generation is ticked off, that generation parlays it the next and so.

As a language construct Newton's motion law words are truth. As a stand alone law of physics they are a lie in conflict with Newton's first rule of scientific reasoning.

The necessity of an exception to make a language construct a truth divides this Newtonian construct into two parts. An actual a law of physics and then a consideration of a second law of physics. The actual law of physics is the result of the product of a mass magnitude and the velocity magnitude of that mass is uniform momentum. That law of physics was finding its feet before the Copernican revolution. The exception consideration is what happens when an external or Newton second law force is applied to uniform momentum. Societal pass mark desire of students assimilates the law of uniform momentum and the consideration of what happens when an external force is applied to uniform momentum into a word not contained within the law but said to be the overarching explanation of the law. That word being one introduced into scholarship at the time of the introduction of the Copernican revolution into scholarship to get past a troublesome 2,000 year old Aristotelian view of motion and to explain why the earth is suspended above the sun. That word being inertia.

What is stated in Newton's first law prior to UNLESS is perfectly explained (sufficiently with respect of Newton's first rule of scientific reasoning) by the product of mass and velocity. Scientifically, the product of mass and velocity being a constant is the reason momentum is conserved both prior to and after a collision.

12th fly to Christchurch

13th queenstown

14th queenstown

15th Queenstown

16th queenstown

17th christchurch

18thst fiji nadi

21st suva

24thvolvoli

26th nadi

26th

27th brisbane

13th queenstown

14th queenstown

15th Queenstown

16th queenstown

17th christchurch

18thst fiji nadi

21st suva

24thvolvoli

26th nadi

26th

27th brisbane

Dear George,

I was pleased to meet with you yesterday and thank you for your email. If you remain convinced that you are in possession of the one true theory of gravity and that Newton and everyone else that has followed since 1687 are wrong, then I encourage you to publish your ideas.

Kind regards,

H

I was pleased to meet with you yesterday and thank you for your email. If you remain convinced that you are in possession of the one true theory of gravity and that Newton and everyone else that has followed since 1687 are wrong, then I encourage you to publish your ideas.

Kind regards,

H

1 newton's law of gravity basic problem how made

2 newton's first law of motion

2 newton's first law of motion

This email is dated 28 of March 2023. It may be sufficient to change the course of life on earth for the better. It is from a professor Harry Quiney, the head of the Melbourne university physics department after a half hour or so meeting the dat before. would have preferred if the professor had taken the matter over. But there it was. An allowance that if not wrong, then Newton could have been wrong about the apple causing the earth fall towards the apple as the apple fell to the earth. I had made it clear to the professor that the inverse square law of gravity strength diminish or of a correlation between gravity strength and the magnitude of the body causing the gravity were not being questioned. All that was being pointed out as a mistake was the presumption that gravity fields are indefinite extensions from their source particle. The professors starting position was they must be. We have landed men on the moon and taken photos of the distant planets of the solar system. Then when taken to the high probability of a relationship between both the turn rate of a gravity field and the turn rate of the planet within and also between the turn rates of adjacent gravity fields the scientist in him must have opened up after we parted company. The turn rate of a planet is its day length so if an understanding of turn rates had been cracked, then the world would be in a position to visit the universe through fresh eyes.

All that has to be done in the first instant is to understand the high tide under the moon through the mathematical analysis that demonstrates that the apple did not cause the earth to fall in the slightest. Then understand the high tide on the other side of the earth through through Sir Isaac newton's third law. To every force there is an equal and opposite force is that law.

I will do the tide sort out and Newton's mistake in the next video. This is an introductory video that outlines the high probability of a relationship between turns rates of planets and moon and the turn rates of their gravity fields that had apparently intrigued the professor after we parted company.

The same face of the moon is always towards the earth. The moon being turned directly by its gravity field explains that. But these tables that the telescope has procured in the las centyury pr so

All that has to be done in the first instant is to understand the high tide under the moon through the mathematical analysis that demonstrates that the apple did not cause the earth to fall in the slightest. Then understand the high tide on the other side of the earth through through Sir Isaac newton's third law. To every force there is an equal and opposite force is that law.

I will do the tide sort out and Newton's mistake in the next video. This is an introductory video that outlines the high probability of a relationship between turns rates of planets and moon and the turn rates of their gravity fields that had apparently intrigued the professor after we parted company.

The same face of the moon is always towards the earth. The moon being turned directly by its gravity field explains that. But these tables that the telescope has procured in the las centyury pr so

This 28th of March 2023 email is from Professor Harry Quiney, head of the physics department of the Melbourne university. The email that the thanks refer had to do with the rotation rates of the planets of the solar system. I had forgotten to highlight this during our brief meeting the previous day. A meeting that had been arranged to point out that Newton's law of gravity in its totality is holding us in an ignorance about the universe. The Australian government educational institutions need to get beyond its sleight of hand wording and to get to the high and low tides of the earth through equal and opposite planetary forces and to then consider that the turn rates of the planets have to do with the turn rates of their gravity fields in a way that locks the elements of the solar system together. Whether that was the reason of the return email, who knows but I was reasonably satisfied with the go I had had at explaining to the Australian government through this professor where the world's educational problems in what had been a hard to obtain appointment. The professor's reply showed signs of being uncertain that the Newtonian track was on the right track with respect of why the planet we are on turns at a rate similar to Mars for instance.

As you can see the professor's email ends with publication encouragement. However without specific direction from a professor, what publishing company is going to publish against what amounts to the government. So I replied that I would prefer making a video. My sometimes speech impediment aside, I had liked the calm way I had been able to talk when the professor and I had brought the necessary diagrams up on his computer. The mistake in the government endorsed gravity theory is very straight forward. All that is needed to understand the mistake in the first instance is acknowledgement that, along the axis that runs between the earth and the moon, the direction of fall alternates. The professor accused me of being obsessive about the alternation. Which arguably I am given that no one else seems to be.

Allowing that a video on the internet is only self published, the professor is thanked for his encouragement. Importantly the viewer should be able to see that the institutions of the Australian government are not being held in any form of seditious contempt. There is no desire to unmoor the basic way of Australian academic life from itself just because that way of life is espousing a 336 year old errant law of gravity to the students it undertakes to honestly educate about the universe. Much needed as it is, the only hope is for a calm academic sort out of itself. To reach an understanding that landing a man on the moon does not mean or prove that every particle in the univers is attracting every other particle in the universe.

So as much as Kepler's third law table became the basis of what is known as the Copernican revolution, all things equal the turn rate tables and ratios that the telescope has more recently procured should become the basis of the Venus transit sort out for modern academia.