What do the arrows mean? I that one of your personal undefined symbols?Would a+b = a.b?
Would a and b retain their individual properties?
→
E(e-)
+
→
E(+1e)
=
a.b
a+b=Physicality?
a.b=a.b
As far as I can tell that post is devoid of any meaning.N+(e-)+(+1e)=>4/3πr³
This abstract states Neutral plus positive and negative energy equate to a bigger sphere?
E= electric fieldWhat do the arrows mean? I that one of your personal undefined symbols?
What does E(e-) mean?
What does a.b mean.
What do you mean by physicality?
I did say it was abstract, it is a statement in maths symbols to show the process action/event.As far as I can tell that post is devoid of any meaning.
That is like saying Tuesday plus a cat results in a velocity change...
Since you make up definitions I had to ask.E= electric field
arrow = vector
(see Maxwell's equations)
e- is the symbol for an electron. e+ is the symbol for a positron. An electron will have an electric field pointing towards the electron. A positron will have an electric field pointing away from it.e- is negative
+1e is positive
a is e-
b is +1e
e- and e+ are not vectors so they cannot have a dot product.a.b dot product
Again since you make up symbols and definitions it is important to ask to understand your question.Physicality means it becomes/is a real object.
physicality
fɪzɪˈkalɪti/
noun
- the fact of relating to the body as opposed to the mind; physical presence
If you are so abstract that your statement is meaningless that is rather pointless.I did say it was abstract, it is a statement in maths symbols to show the process action/event.
Meaningless. How do you add positive and negative energy. What is negative energy?We start with a Neutral object N
we then add positive and negative energy +(e-)+(+1e)
What you have written is N + 2 electrons = the equation for the volume of a sphere.The object expands.>4/3πr³
N+(e-)+(+1e)=>4/3πr³
I have not written +2 electrons, I have written two opposite poles.If you are so abstract that your statement is meaningless that is rather pointless.
Meaningless. How do you add positive and negative energy. What is negative energy?
What you have written is N + 2 electrons = the equation for the volume of a sphere.
Meaningless
Opposite poles? We are talking about charged masses not magnets. So what you mean is you have to particles or masses with positive and negative charges.I have not written +2 electrons, I have written two opposite poles.
I explained it
We start with a Neutral object N
we then add positive and negative energy +(e-)+(+1e)
The object expands.>4/3πr³
N+(e-)+(+1e)=>4/3πr³
It is so abstract that it is meaningless. Your math symbols are used incorrectly and convey nothing. You are using the language incorrectly to the point I do not know what you are trying to say...I did say it was abstract, it is a statement in maths symbols to show the process action/event. I am using it as a language.
Maybe... Are you trying to say that if the energy of an object is increased the mass will increase? Along the lines of relativistic mass?A Neural object gains energy , this energy has a negative and a positive polarity and measures neutral. When this object gains this energy, the objects expands. This is just a fundamental look at the process is simple form without quantities. To explain the same sentence using maths symbols, I will make it even more short hand,
N+E=>4/3πr³
Can you understand this now?
I have no desire to learn your 'language'. If you want to discuss science it is up to you to learn the language of science.Maybe if you can learn my ''language'', you will understand I better , I am trying to understand your language and learning your math ''language''.
That means that E=0. So that is pointless.N is the sphere...
4/3πr³ + E = >4/3πr³
Note the term thermal! It is an expansion due to temperature.p.s In your terms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_expansion
The coefficient of thermal expansion(Y) describes how the size of an object changes with a change in temperature.
Nowhere did you describe a field change due to a change in energy and polarity. Is that what you thought you did?I am describing how the size of a field changes with a change in energy and polarity.
That is too convoluted to have any meaning.added- please try to understand the below sentence:
ΔE=ΔkE=ΔT=Δ4/3πr³
If you can read the above sentence, you can read the below sentence:
→
EΔ=Δ(q1+q2)
→
E = electrical field
E=energy
q1 is polarity pos
q2 is polarity neg
That again is wrong or just plain meaningless.Maybe this is your language when explaining universal expansion?
ΔL/L = ∝ L ΔS
or
→
EΔL/L = ∝ LΔS ???
ΔT=ΔS
Δt=ΔS
ΔL=ΔS
ΔR³=ΔS
Yes the E's in the first ''equation'' are energy where the E with a vector arrow is an electrical field.Opposite poles? We are talking about charged masses not magnets. So what you mean is you have to particles or masses with positive and negative charges.
This is no better. You are saying a Neutral object with a positive charge added and a negative charge added equals the equation for the volume of a sphere.
That is meaningless.
It is so abstract that it is meaningless. Your math symbols are used incorrectly and convey nothing. You are using the language incorrectly to the point I do not know what you are trying to say...
Maybe... Are you trying to say that if the energy of an object is increased the mass will increase? Along the lines of relativistic mass?
I have no desire to learn your 'language'. If you want to discuss science it is up to you to learn the language of science.
That means that E=0. So that is pointless.
Note the term thermal! It is an expansion due to temperature.
Nowhere did you describe a field change due to a change in energy and polarity. Is that what you thought you did?
That is too convoluted to have any meaning.
You should stick to trying to explain with words your math is all screwed up. It would be like me trying to explain what the Olympics are in Swahili by looking up 10 or 15 words in that language - it isn't going to work!
PS. Are all of the 'Es' in the first "equation" supposed to be Energy and not the electric field. This won't help much, just curious.
Maybe... Are you trying to say that if the energy of an object is increased the mass will increase? Along the lines of relativistic mass?
Nowhere did you describe a field change due to a change in energy and polarity. Is that what you thought you did?
If it was actually math that had some logic then maybe it would be worth it, but unfortunately your confusion and lack of knowledge combined with your redefining terms makes the whole posts gibberish.I understand the difficultly in learning somebody else's devised math. Maybe I should return to words, which may or may not be better.
There is no such thing as kinetic excitement!I am saying of opinion, that if the energy of an object is increased ΔE, there is affect . Firstly the affect is a kinetic excitement increase ΔkE
If I put a large static charge onto a mass its temperature will not change. If I increase the speed of an object outside of the atmosphere it's temperature will not change. If I add THERMAL energy most materials will expand.this then raises the temperature ΔT , the object will then expand ΔR³ , all this a consequence and equal in action to ΔE.
Fields do not have mass, well maybe corn fields.Yes the object gains relative mass, if a field density was to increase in a volume of space, the field density would gain relative mass.
That is nonsense.→
E in Maxwell's equations is an electrical field vector, the direction the field is going directly proportional to the inverse.
Only in ONE spot in the fields will that be true. It most areas of the 2 field the combined fields will NOT cancel each other.This field is neutral in polarity , a dot product of a positive field (a) and a negative field (b) to result in a.b=N.
Wrong.ΔN is equal to a change in polarity, i.e polarized
I pretty much disagree with everything you have written in this entire thread.Do you disagree with this?
Before you think this wrong, we now need to go back to the discussion of the matrix's and I have you a question.If it was actually math that had some logic then maybe it would be worth it, but unfortunately your confusion and lack of knowledge combined with your redefining terms makes the whole posts gibberish.
There is no such thing as kinetic excitement!
If I put a large static charge onto a mass its temperature will not change. If I increase the speed of an object outside of the atmosphere it's temperature will not change. If I add THERMAL energy most materials will expand.
Fields do not have mass, well maybe corn fields.
That is nonsense.
Only in ONE spot in the fields will that be true. It most areas of the 2 field the combined fields will NOT cancel each other.
Remember that you defined a and b as charges, now they are fields???? You cannot even keep this shit straight!
Wrong.
I pretty much disagree with everything you have written in this entire thread...
unfortunately there is no need to look any further into your question because your defined matrix is nonsense.Before you think this wrong, we now need to go back to the discussion of the matrix's and I have you a question.
Let us define a 3*3*3 mono-pole Cartesian coordinate matrix that the internal energy is positive charge.
I have it explained it very simple, but ok if I need to explain my opinion even simpler.unfortunately there is no need to look any further into your question because your defined matrix is nonsense.
I think you are trying to use technical sounding words to give your ideas a sense of legitimacy and all you are accomplishing is writing nonsense. Use language that is as plain as possible and maybe you can make your point - I have no idea what your point is other than heating something up makes it expand in most cases, which is obvious.
Just to let you know a 3*3*3 matrix would have 27 elements, not 3.Let us define a 3*3*3mono-pole Cartesian coordinatematrix
who said it wouldn't ,Just to let you know a 3*3*3 matrix would have 27 elements, not 3.
unfortunately there is no need to look any further into your question because your defined matrix is nonsense.
I think you are trying to use technical sounding words to give your ideas a sense of legitimacy and all you are accomplishing is writing nonsense. Use language that is as plain as possible and maybe you can make your point - I have no idea what your point is other than heating something up makes it expand in most cases, which is obvious.