"Acceleration produces a force. Force times distance = energy. "
I am aware that this is a well-vetted, common equation; but if used in
this case, then an object accelerating at 1 m/s^2 for 10 seconds, and
travelling at 200 m/s, with respect to a common point, would require
approximately twice as much energy as an object accelerating at 1 m/s^2
for 10 seconds, and travelling at 100 m/s.
As Einstein asked, which one is travelling at which speed? From the
point of view of the first object, it doesn't know that it's travelling
at 200 m/s. It sees the common point moving by at 200 m/s. When
calculating the acceleration of a rocket, one doesn't use distance
travelled. The calculation uses force multiplied by time. The
acceleration doesn't drop off as the rocket increases in speed.
Craig
On 03/14/2016 12:17 AM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Craig Haynie's message of Sun, 13 Mar 2016 21:08:43 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
Note the use of the word "acceleration".
Acceleration produces a force. Force times distance = energy.
This doesn't make any sense:
"For a given acceleration period, the higher the mean velocity, the
longer the distance travelled, hence the higher the energy lost by the
engine."
Since we're not talking about relativistic speeds, then the idea that a
device will consume more energy, over a given period of time, simply
because it's moving, would violate Einstein's Special Relativity which
says there's no preferred frame of reference. The moving object cannot
be said to be moving at all.
Craig
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
