how is F=ma not a vacuous tautology?you need a mass to determine forcebut without force you can't determine massthis is circular logic
>>16977010It's not circular or logic, it's an equation that you can use to determine a 3rd variable if you know 2 other variables based on an approximation of how reality works on human scale environments.
>>16977010It's a precise way to say that some things are inherently harder to get moving than others, for a sense of "harder" that's abstracted from the duration or distance of the effort's application.
>if I don't know [math] \pi [/math], I can't determine a circle>but without a circle I can't determine [math] \pi [/math]Your logic OP. You're retarded.
>>16977109If his logic is so retarded why did you end up basically conceding his point? π is a defined quantity and any truth related to it is a tautology.
>>16977010F=mae=mc^2m=e/c^2F=(ea)/c^2W=Fddistance is the double integral of acceleration. therefore work is mass and gravity is time. interita, bumblefuck.
>>16977111Do you know why we use equality signs in mathematics? Many equations could be considered a tautology. So why is retard OP thinking about F=ma as if it has something to do with physics rather than axioms of math? Also pi and a circle isn't the same thing you fucking retard, one is defined by the other, but that doesn't mean it's the same thing.Definitions are not tautologies. F=ma is not a trivial statement either. You can determine mass through other means. You can also determine force through other means. Primarily [math} F = \frac{dp}{dt} [/math]You can measure momentum (and therefore its change) with a simple plate and a ruler. If you know the velocity, you can also determine the mass. Go back to school, honestly. You are all fucking mentally deranged schizos with an IQ of a rock, zero real knowledge, zero intelligence, are you all bonafide youtube professors? Go learn some math you fucking retard.
>>16977117>incoherent chimpout
>>16977117bro hit him with ohm's law like it a brick
You need 1 + 1 apples to determine 2 apples but you need 2 apples to determine 1 + 1 apples. 1+1=2 is circular logic how can this be?
>where they stumble.pngFor 90 IQs, it's making and interpreting analogies.
If the mass had gravitational force holding it with the sun, then a force in it would split against the opposite side of it.
>>16977010You miss the other equation, newtons law of gravitation. Measure acceleration and you can calculate the mass and the force. The two equations combined are not ambigious.
>>16977139Heres an example of the method, albeit not very practical with small masses.Take two equal masses, say two steel spheres of the same diameter, placed at a distance of 1 meter. Then notice the acceleration between them. Not so easy, its done with a torsion scale.With that acceleration you can calculate the mass of each, and mass times the acceleration (which you just measure) is the force.No ambiguity.
>>16977179Oh, and if the masses are different or you just dont think two spheres of the same diameter and material have the same mass.. just measure each acceleration. The ratio of accelerations tells you the ratio of masses, so it doesnt matter if the masses are not exactly equal.This means you dont need to be handed over a reference mass for the method to work, the two equations suffice
the aliens said the nuclear forces are between two
>>16977010m and a are usually givens because they take less steps to measure
>>16977010You forgot "+AI"
>>16977010you can remove force from newtonian physics. but it's a good construct with intuitive sense. good luck creating a physics theory without any higher constructs other than x and t.
