David Thomson wrote: > Hi Harry, > >> Is y = xa^2 not an equation? >> Yes, it is the equation of a straight line with slope a^2. > > Of course, it is an equation. All the variables are truly variables and > have the same dimension of one. Do you really think that E=mc^2 is the > equation of a straight line with slope c^2? Are you implying that because > y=xa^2 is an equation that p=ac^2 is an equation where p is pressure, a is > acceleration, and c is the speed of light?
No, because a variable with a mass dimension is missing from the right side of the equation. Besides, I was only addressing your remark about it not being an equation. > When you arbitrarily change variables to constants and assign specific > dimensions to other variables, you end up with completely different > expressions. Of course, but there is no such problem with E = mc^2. > In the case where y and x are given specific dimensions, those dimensions > have specific implied values, depending upon the system of units used. For > example, in the MKS system of units: > > joule = kilogram * (meter/second)^2 > > You cannot then arbitrarily change the unit values for meters per second to > a different value and still have an equality. > > Once you assign a constant to one of the variables, which is not consistent > with the system of units being used, but the dimension of c^2 is consistent with energy units. > the other variables cannot maintain > their dimensions within the equation. You end up with: > > y = xc^2 > > You cannot reference y as energy or x as mass. Since c was arbitrarily > chosen, x and y are now also arbitrary. You would need a system of units > where v^2 = c^2, such as in the Aether Physics Model's quantum measurements > units, in order have a dimensional equation involving c^2. > > True, there are many situations that will work as though x is mass and y is > energy, but it is not a mathematical certainty. Therefore, it is possible > for many applications of E=mc^2 to appear to be valid, but there are also > applications for where it is not. > ? Sorry, I just don't see what you see. harry
