The proof of mass vector.
in [Math]
|
Prev: infinity ...
Next: The set of All sets
From: Eric Gisse on 3 Apr 2006 21:55 Ka-In Yen wrote: > Dear Bill Hobba, > Thank you for your comment. > > Bill Hobba wrote: > > "Ka-In Yen" <yenkain(a)yahoo.com.tw> wrote in message > > news:1144028073.121452.279020(a)j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > > Is it useful? > > > 2. Linear mass density is a vector. > > > The mass of a string is M kg, and the length of the string > > > is l m<i:3>. Where l m is the magnitude of the length, and > > > <i:3> is a 3-D unit vector which gives the direction of the > > > string. Then the linear mass density of the string is: > > > > > > > > > M/(l<i:3>)=(M/l) (kg/m)<i:3> > > > / > > You can not divide by vectors. > > Why? Uh, because it is not a defined operaton? What is the result from dividing the unit vector "i" by the unit vector "j" ?
From: Bill Hobba on 3 Apr 2006 23:21 "Ka-In Yen" <yenkain(a)yahoo.com.tw> wrote in message news:1144112932.833871.196670(a)i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Dear Bill Hobba, > Thank you for your comment. > > Bill Hobba wrote: >> "Ka-In Yen" <yenkain(a)yahoo.com.tw> wrote in message >> news:1144028073.121452.279020(a)j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >> > Is it useful? >> > 2. Linear mass density is a vector. >> > The mass of a string is M kg, and the length of the string >> > is l m<i:3>. Where l m is the magnitude of the length, and >> > <i:3> is a 3-D unit vector which gives the direction of the >> > string. Then the linear mass density of the string is: >> > >> > >> > M/(l<i:3>)=(M/l) (kg/m)<i:3> >> > / >> You can not divide by vectors. > > Why? http://www.mcasco.com/qa_vdq.html Bill
From: Ka-In Yen on 4 Apr 2006 20:09 Dear Eric Gisse, Thank you for your comment. Eric Gisse wrote: > Ka-In Yen wrote: > > Dear Bill Hobba, > > Thank you for your comment. > > > > Bill Hobba wrote: > > > "Ka-In Yen" <yenkain(a)yahoo.com.tw> wrote in message > > > news:1144028073.121452.279020(a)j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > > > Is it useful? > > > > 2. Linear mass density is a vector. > > > > The mass of a string is M kg, and the length of the string > > > > is l m<i:3>. Where l m is the magnitude of the length, and > > > > <i:3> is a 3-D unit vector which gives the direction of the > > > > string. Then the linear mass density of the string is: > > > > > > > > > > > > M/(l<i:3>)=(M/l) (kg/m)<i:3> > > > > > > You can not divide by vectors. > > > > Why? / > Uh, because it is not a defined operaton? Are we forbidden to define it?
From: Bill Hobba on 4 Apr 2006 22:41 "Ka-In Yen" <yenkain(a)yahoo.com.tw> wrote in message news:1144195786.176377.275130(a)i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Dear Eric Gisse, > > Thank you for your comment. > > Eric Gisse wrote: >> Ka-In Yen wrote: >> > Dear Bill Hobba, >> > Thank you for your comment. >> > >> > Bill Hobba wrote: >> > > "Ka-In Yen" <yenkain(a)yahoo.com.tw> wrote in message >> > > news:1144028073.121452.279020(a)j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >> > > > Is it useful? >> > > > 2. Linear mass density is a vector. >> > > > The mass of a string is M kg, and the length of the string >> > > > is l m<i:3>. Where l m is the magnitude of the length, and >> > > > <i:3> is a 3-D unit vector which gives the direction of the >> > > > string. Then the linear mass density of the string is: >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > M/(l<i:3>)=(M/l) (kg/m)<i:3> >> > > >> > > You can not divide by vectors. >> > >> > Why? > / >> Uh, because it is not a defined operaton? > > Are we forbidden to define it? Nope - but due the existence problem you need to demonstrate one exists before defining it. And if memory serves me correctly a theorem says you can't do it for 3 dimensions. You can for four but assocativty goes out then window and higher dimensions are even more problematical. You are welcome to try however - but to speak of a multiplicative inverse you need to define it and demonstrate it is an inverse. What I don't understand about your type is why with zero actual knowledge of a subject you believe it is wrong and you can revolutionaries it. Bill
From: Eric Gisse on 4 Apr 2006 23:01
Bill Hobba wrote: [snip] > > What I don't understand about your type is why with zero actual knowledge of > a subject you believe it is wrong and you can revolutionaries it. People have heard the fables of how Einstein failed all his math classes and still revolutionized physics and believe they can do the same. > > Bill |