Physics tells us that F=M*sqr(V)
Is it really so?
Seems more like a parabolic function.
When you fall into earth, its the same force as falling onto any fixed object, such as a 1/2 of earth. More on this later
Also, some of the equations dont seem to consider that motion has an infintesimally small resolution, when combining two forces with unknown temporal resolutions whos force is “exponential based on the distance” this is a problem
Such things have been examined millions of times by very educated and jealous skeptics. There are ontological flaws being presumed, but not such as to make any equation in error, merely the interpretation of the equations.
(and motion does NOT have a lower resolution, despite the Quantum Magi’s wet dreams).
The resolution gets so small it fragments into duality and improbability. What resolution would you stop at?
Duality and improbability are MENTAL issues, not physical. Motion has no lower resolution at all. Motion has no “stop”. There are degrees of infinitesimal motion in literally all things at all times. There is no absolute zero nor absolute smallest step.
Nothing is ever at rest any way since the universe is in a constant state of motion due to gravity
You can however measure motion in individual frames of time as small as a fraction of a second
Perhaps my interpretation of the equations is wrong, but if f=m*sqr(v) why does an object bounce back the same as in the following example?
Consider that there are 2 bodies, one with a mass of the Earth, but one with a mass of the moon.
An object, a human, approaches both objects at the same speed. It collides.
The force upon the human is exactly the same, feels exactly the same, and has a push back exactly the same.
So we should assume that f=m*sqr(v) only applies to objects with low masses, and it is a parabolic function, rather than exponential. Once the formula starts dealing with medium masses, it loses its exponentiality, and as the masses get higher and higher, the variance decays exponentially.
No. Physics doesn’t tell us that.
Where did you get that equation?
Highschool physics and I cant find it on google, so I suspect they’ve changed their equations since then, and or I have entered another timeline.
think about it though, bullets do a lot of damage because (at small scale) force does depend more on the velocity than the mass.
I mean, if f=mv then a bowling ball going 1 mile an hour would hurt as much as a 22 calibre bullet. (2grams1500 fps=6 pounds*1fps)
So force does equal m*sqr(v), but only at small scales.
Or you just got it wrong.
Momentum = mv . Force is the the rate of change of momentum F=ma.
Centripetal force =m*sqr(v)/r is the closest thing to your equation.
A bowling ball impact is distributed over a large area so it probably does less damage. It might hurt more because it affects more pain receptors.
That is a false conclusion. Imagine if the bowling ball was transformed into a very long heavy pencil, going only 1 mile an hour. it wouldnt hurt
the damage is msqr(v) not mv
It is the energy that you are looking for:
damage = E = ½mv²
Or the Impact or Impulse:
J = ∫(mv)/dt * dt
which is just the change in momentum, ∆ρ.
Yeah, It’s not a pencil.
Your equation is wrong. Nuff said.
If you want to discuss it with someone else, then knock yourself out.
well in that case, it is the energy formula which is mistaken.
and what’s with e=m*sqr(c)? there is no variable component to the equation, it’s all a fixed value. If the mass varies based on its speed, theres no where to input a speed in the equation, so the mass is calculated elsewhere. so it just seems like an arbitary equation that doesnt do anything, and it doesnt even match the other energy equation because it forgot to divide the mass by two. science doesnt add up. im starting to wonder if its all a hoax?
Everything seems like a hoax until you understand it.
E = mc² is the amount of energy stored within the mass.
E = ½mv² is the energy stored in the relative motion of the mass.