# how it works?

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by ethernos, Sep 8, 2017.

1. ### ethernosRegistered Member

Messages:
87
integral a to 0 accelartion x volume
x time dx

3. ### originIn a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
10,714
Acceleration x volume x time? That leaves you with $\frac{m^4}{s}$, what is that suppose to be?

Are you just trolling here or is there something you want to discuss?

ethernos likes this.

5. ### ethernosRegistered Member

Messages:
87
i also would like to know what it is.

7. ### originIn a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
10,714
What is 'it'?

Messages:
87
m^4

9. ### originIn a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
10,714
$m^4$ is nonsense in a physical sense. Mathematically you can take 1 m and raise it to the 4th power and it would give $1 m^4$

10. ### ethernosRegistered Member

Messages:
87
in non physical sense does it make sense?

11. ### originIn a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
10,714
I have no idea how to respond to that.
Try this, write out 3 - 5 complete sentences that describe what it is you are trying to discover.

12. ### exchemistValued Senior Member

Messages:
7,813
Thread reported with request for it to go to the cesspool.

Nothing Ethernos has posted makes any sense whatsoever.

13. ### KittamaruAshes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
13,938
Lets give this one last chance:

Ethernos - what, exactly, are you trying to do? Is this a math problem from your homework?

14. ### exchemistValued Senior Member

Messages:
7,813
Good to see you are on the case. Thanks.

15. ### ethernosRegistered Member

Messages:
87
no! sorry. what i actually tried to ask was "could volume be reduced or increased due to acceleration and time?"

16. ### KittamaruAshes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
13,938
The only way I can think of off the top of my head for acceleration/deceleration to affect volume would be through resistance causing an increase in temperature in a substance resulting in a state change from liquid to gas (which would result in an increase in volume for a given mass).

Beyond that, I don't believe it does - someone with a deeper physics background could probably explain better.

As for time - again, I don't believe the passing of time itself affects volume. It could indirectly, via decomposition and the like.

ethernos likes this.

Messages:
87
thank you...

18. ### hansdaValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,424
If this object is accelerated to a relativistic speed, its volume will decrease as per Lorentz length reduction.

ethernos likes this.
19. ### originIn a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
10,714
That depends on which frame you are in.

20. ### hansdaValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,424
See the Lorentz equation for length reduction.

ethernos likes this.
21. ### KittamaruAshes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
13,938
I was under the impression that Lorentz Length Reduction was only based on the stationary outside observer, not the "actual" length? Eg, a co-moving object within the vessels rest frame will not notice a reduction in length, and thus would not note a reduction in volume. As a result, the "actual" volume of the vessel would not decrease (ergo, if you have a vessel of one cubic meter full of water, and accelerate it to 90% the speed of light, water would not "spill out" due to Lorentz Reduction).

ethernos likes this.

Messages:
10,714