It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

There is no such 'thing' as energy.

page: 4
13
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 5 2018 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: ColinT

So because all of your assertions and erroneous interpretations were proven incorrect within a couple of pages that means science is wrong...

Gotcha.




posted on Jun, 5 2018 @ 12:14 PM
link   
a reply to: ColinT




Energy, momentum, power and so forth are invisible. They always have been and will be because they are not observables: not physically real. They are concepts within the minds of Men, useful in describing and explaining the manifest phenomena of the Physical Realm, but not a part of it.


Not necessarily so. Humans are limited in their ability to detect much that exists in nature.
The wavelengths of light visible to a human are between 390 and 750 nanometers. Some animals can detect other wavelengths. Instrumentation is also limited. However, that doesn't rule out the possibility that other beings can't "see" energy.

That said, energy is a quantifiable property - it can be measured. Anything that can be measured is very real even if you can't see it, feel it or pick it up and put into a box. By contrast, a "concept" as you describe energy, is not quantifiable and can't be measured. A concept is imaginary.

The mass-energy equivalence formula describes the relationship between the mass of an object and its inherent energy. That energy can be measured. That formula was used to calculate the amount of energy generated by the nuclear fission reaction (look it up). If that energy yield was a "concept" and not real, the predictions made by the scientists would be null and void - i.e. meaningless.

Anything that can be measured is very real be it energy in a stationary object, dark energy, dark matter, whatever. The fact that we can't visualize it only points to our limitations.




edit on 5-6-2018 by Phantom423 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2018 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: ColinT


Energy, momentum, power and so forth are invisible. They always have been and will be because they are not observables: not physically real. They are concepts within the minds of Men, useful in describing and explaining the manifest phenomena of the Physical Realm, but not a part of it.



originally posted by: Phantom423
Not necessarily so. Humans are limited in their ability to detect much that exists in nature.
The wavelengths of light visible to a human are between 390 and 750 nanometers.
Expand on what we can see for a moment, instead of what we can't see. What is that between 390 and 750 nm that we can see? It's called visible light, right? And that is a form of energy, right? How is seeing light energy with our eyes not observing it? In this video Richard Feynman makes fun of the philosophical idea that when we see a steak, we are only seeing light from the steak and not the steak, but he also doesn't deny that it's true. His point is the light from the steak implies to an reasonable person that the steak is there, but it's really light energy that is entering our eyes, and not the steak.



Our other senses "observe" other forms of energy, acoustic energy with our ears, and heat or infrared energy with our skin's sensors, so it sounds very silly to hear Colin say energy isn't observable.



posted on Jun, 5 2018 @ 07:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Great video. Feynman had a choice: he could be a great physicist or a late night talk show host playing his bongos. He chose the former. I love that guy.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 09:24 PM
link   
a reply to: ColinT

If you're saying that 'energy is a quantifiable property of a system' but not the system itself that's what actual physicists have been saying for many years. It's the public that thinks "energy" is a substance of its own independent from the rest.

Energy is interesting because of the conservation laws that come as a result of symmetries in the equations of motion, and as a useful calculational aid.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 09:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
All in all, the speed of light 'c' is conserved at the individual photon level but the propagation speed of the sum of the photons, through the whole shebang, is slowed.


Exactly. The fun part is that it's quantum mechanical and freaky coherent QM state, but otherwise the 'slowing of light' has been done since RF coaxial cables were invented probably around 1900. Whoops, looked it up: Oliver Heaviside 1880.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 09:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
All in all, the speed of light 'c' is conserved at the individual photon level but the propagation speed of the sum of the photons, through the whole shebang, is slowed.


Exactly. The fun part is that it's quantum mechanical and freaky coherent QM state, but otherwise the 'slowing of light' has been done since RF coaxial cables were invented probably around 1900. Whoops, looked it up: Oliver Heaviside 1880.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 10:38 PM
link   
No such thing as energy, when apparently it full of it.

As for numbers and mathz well wouldn't that be like Schrodinger's cat, the cat is ether dead or alive, or the fact that I can count 13 apples like that math vampire from sesame streer, that could be infront of me, and would be reproducible?

I never could understand how they make the pressure or voltage in a circuit. So what would a black hole be, mass or just a hole that might be as fast as the speed of light?



posted on Jun, 17 2018 @ 04:38 AM
link   
a reply to: ColinT

You seem to be forgetting force. Without forces, matter and motion don't exist. You cannot explain force using matter and motion.



posted on Jun, 17 2018 @ 05:40 AM
link   
Energy does exist, it's proven to exist, from measuring the energy from a source, to another object which uses the energy as a power source.

Gravity, on the other hand, has never been proven to exist.


If there is gravity on Earth, and no gravity above Earth's atmosphere, or anywhere beyond that point, to the moon's orbit....how does Earth's gravity hold the moon in place?


Because the 'experts' say it does... that's good enough!



posted on Jun, 17 2018 @ 06:16 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

100% agree on the existence of energy and we've been making 'machines' to convert energy to the type desired for millenia.

However, not sure where you'd get the idea that gravity (a force, not energy) doesn't exist above the earth's atmosphere. Sure an object in stable orbit experiences weightlessness but that's only because the force, an acceleration, produced by V^2/R is equal and opposite to the gravitational acceleration at that altitude thereby nullifying gravity. If the object was motionless it'd drop exactly like a stone.

Gravity is everywhere.



posted on Jun, 17 2018 @ 06:53 AM
link   
All there is is energy but it is not a thing.
The belief in 'things' is the original sin!!

Life is sensational - but there may be a buying into the idea that you are a thing and that life is made of things.


edit on 17-6-2018 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2018 @ 03:13 PM
link   
a reply to: ColinT

More like matter (atoms and their subatomic particle makeup) are merely "energy - eddies" of the smallest type then? I can grok that.



posted on Jun, 18 2018 @ 02:15 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Yes you do. Cant have a static reflection without a dynamic input.



posted on Jun, 18 2018 @ 02:44 PM
link   
But meadows are also fields.

So, do fields exist?




Yes, meadows exist but We call them a "Lea"...



posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 06:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pilgrum
a reply to: turbonium1

100% agree on the existence of energy and we've been making 'machines' to convert energy to the type desired for millenia.

However, not sure where you'd get the idea that gravity (a force, not energy) doesn't exist above the earth's atmosphere. Sure an object in stable orbit experiences weightlessness but that's only because the force, an acceleration, produced by V^2/R is equal and opposite to the gravitational acceleration at that altitude thereby nullifying gravity. If the object was motionless it'd drop exactly like a stone.

Gravity is everywhere.


At risk of going off topic, let's focus on 'gravity', and whether or not it really exists, whether it does everything claimed it does, and what evidence there is for it....

First, 'gravity' is a theory. It is not a fact, it is not proven to even exist.

'Gravity' is assumed to be an established, proven fact, when it has never even been proven to exist.....

Nobody ever questions 'gravity', or anything gravity is claimed to do - since 'gravity' is already established to be 'true', and '100% factual'.... as we know!!

That is the trick - since nobody questions anything, being (or it appears like) an accepted, well-established 'truth'!!


Explain how a force - called 'gravity' - can pull objects to Earth, nearby, while cannot pull ANY objects, in Earth orbit, or anywhere beyond orbit, while somehow, can magically grasp an object about 1/4 million miles away?!?!?

Good one.

An opposing force(s) works against a real force - how else would we know any actual 'force' exists?


If a force called 'gravity' is 'pulling' all objects down to Earth, then objects not pulled down to Earth must oppose it with greater force, in order to break away from the force pulling all objects down towards Earth!


Magnetic force pulls, or repels, a metallic object. Opposing force is required in order for this metallic object, trying to overcome the magnetic force. It cannot break free of the magnetic force without a force greater than the magnetic force. No force can be proven to exist, without having a single opposing force(s).

Gravity doesn't exist.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join