Yes simple school boy maths
Vfinal²=Vinitial²+2ad where d is distance above the ground
set Vfinal=0 and solve for d
problem solved, next question please!
Prentice is on a mish..........
Yes simple school boy maths
Vfinal²=Vinitial²+2ad where d is distance above the ground
set Vfinal=0 and solve for d
problem solved, next question please!
if the motion of the ball is continuous, then the Planck time and the Planck length are the shortest possible time and distance it can stop and reverse directionAre you suggesting then that the ball remains stationary for one planck unit?the smallest possible unit of time in which we can record an event is the Planck Time, 0.539 E-43 seconds. This is the shortest amount of time a particle interaction can take place. To be any shorter, the two particles woudl have to be closer, and then the woudl become indeterminate from one another. This still may not be the shortest interval of discrete time.
not at all, the Plank units are the smallest units of distance and time WE we can observe, but there may be units of time that are shorter and distances that are shorter. we dont know. If Roger Penroses Twistor theroy is correct , then there are smaller units than these, but the dimensionality of space time breaks down. If thats the case we wont be able determine motion changes in 3 dimensions in a 2 dimensional space anyway.Sorry - no offence but I'm struggling with this due to the typos. I'll research and get back to you.The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle states that you the act of observing affects the observation at a quantum level. hence you can determine the velocity of an electron but not its position, or you can determine the postion of an electron but not ist velocity.
Does this not contradict the definition of a planck unit?If there is a point where the ball is stationary, it must occur at a point where its direction reverses in less than the Planck length, in less than the Planck time. we cannot determine at that moment both the position of the ball and the velocity of the ball. Hence we wouldn't be able to determine if it stops or instantly reverses direction.
Perception isn't relevant, surely. It's what a physical (quantum) limit is that countsIn any case, we as humans, even the sharpest of us, cant perceive any event shorter than about 100 milliseconds, and the ball most certainly doesnt stop for that long.
Yes simple school boy maths
Vfinal²=Vinitial²+2ad where d is distance above the ground
set Vfinal=0 and solve for d
problem solved, next question please!
Prentice is on a mish..........
It does depend on relative density, and my uncle's thick as firk!I beg to differ.- if a rocket's engine hasn't created enough force (propulsion) to overcome the force of gravity, then the rocket will not leave the ground. The analogy with the above holds
We seem to have determined it to be either zero (it time is continuous) or 1 planck (if time is discrete, but also continuous )BUT....the time it is stationary is so small, and unmeasurable, it cannot be determined.
We seem to have determined it to be either zero (it time is continuous) or 1 planck (if time is discrete, but also continuous )BUT....the time it is stationary is so small, and unmeasurable, it cannot be determined.
Bit of a harsh precis of some newtonian mechanicsNah its a schoolboy simplification of the problem, its accurate enough for A Levels and thats about it.
Can't get cigarette paper thin enoughbut if its less than the Planck time, we cant measure it for all sorts of reasons.
We seem to have determined it to be either zero (it time is continuous) or 1 planck (if time is discrete, but also continuous )BUT....the time it is stationary is so small, and unmeasurable, it cannot be determined.
yes, pretty much so.
but if its less than the Planck time, we cant measure it for all sorts of reasons.
Bit of a harsh precis of some newtonian mechanicsNah its a schoolboy simplification of the problem, its accurate enough for A Levels and thats about it.
Anyway, the formula referred to relates to the energy changes (as it's based on the relationship between kinetic and potential energy), which is surely part of quantum physics
Leslie Grantham - as in Dirty Den from EastendersHim and Margaret Thatcher was Granthams contribution to UK history.........
but if its less than the Planck time, we cant measure it for all sorts of reasons.
is that not relative to the puzzle, the ball will stop when it reaches zero velocity, for how long god knows.(as it's based on the relationship between kinetic and potential energy), which is surely part of quantum physics
is that not relative to the puzzle, the ball will stop when it reaches zero velocity, for how long god knows.(as it's based on the relationship between kinetic and potential energy), which is surely part of quantum physics
but if its less than the Planck time, we cant measure it for all sorts of reasons.
So if it cant be measured ...........There is no conclusive answer...?????????????
There COULD be a point at which the ball is 'stationary'........
(my coats already on).....