"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.athghost7038suus.net> wrote in 
  message news:1k7lm2-ngp.ln1@sirius.athghost7038suus.net...
> In sci.physics, Traveler
> <traveler@nospam.net> wrote on Fri, 27 May 2005 12:42:31 -0400
> <g6je911vunplogh5joiqsacsanh36cch0c@4ax.com>:
> > Why Energy Is Needed to Maintain Inertial Motion
> >
> > Motion is a change in a particle's position. Motion consists of a
> > series of quantum jumps. Energy is needed to cause a particle to
> > undergo a quantum jump from one position to the next. Physics assumes
> > that, if the initial causal energy (an interaction with another
> > particle) is remove after the initial jump, the particle will continue
> > to make jumps afterwards for no reason, as if by magic.
> >
> > My thesis is that this is absurd and illogical. Every quantum jump is
> > an effect which must be caused. This is the law of cause and effect. 
> > It follows that inertial motion must be caused. It requires energy and
> > acceleration requires even more energy.
> >
> > Simple logical deduction tells us that a particle in motion must
> > undergo a series of interactions in order to remain in motion. What is
> > the source of the energy required to maintain particles in motion? One
> > is force to conclude that particles are moving in a multi-dimensional
> > ocean of energetic particles. The energy of the ocean's particles must
> > range from the fundamental energy (possibly the Planck energy) to a
> > very high energy level. It takes as much energy as a particle's rest
> > mass (* c-squared) to get the particle to make a jump within a
> > fundamental interval.
> >
> > My thesis is that the causality of motion is the primary reason for an
> > aether. The aether is not needed because we need a medium for EM wave
> > propagation (that's obviously crap). It is needed because, without it,
> > there would be no motion. Identifying the composition of the aether
> > should be the primary goal of physics. Why? Because, first of all, it
> > is a source of unlimited energy. Second, once we know the exact
> > composition of the aether and how normal matter interacts with the
> > particles that comprise it, we'll be able to build ships that can
> > navigate it with no visible means of propulsion and no on-board energy
> > store. The energy of the aether will be sufficient for propulsion even
> > at close to the speed of light.
> >
> > ---------------
> >
> > I now arrive at the most important part of my post which is: If you
> > don't agree with the above, you're a fucking crackpot and a cretinous
> > sack of shit. Especially if your name is Dick Van de merde or Uncle
> > Dickhead.... ...hahaha.... HAHAHAHA...hahahaaaaa....HAHAHAHAAA...haha.
> >
> > Phew! Physics is so much Phucking Phun!  ...hahaha...
> >
> > Louis Savain
> >
> > The Silver Bullet: Why Software Is Bad and What We Can Do to Fix it
> > http://users.adelphia.net/~lilavois/Cosas/Reliability.htm
> 
> Simple, practical, engineering question follows:
> 
> For example, I have, conveniently enough, a mass of approximately
> 5.976 * 10^24 kg moving in a curved path (curved because there's
> an even bigger mass of 1.9862 * 10^30 kg about 1.501 * 10^11 m
> away).  The current speed of motion is approximately 3 * 10^4 m/s.
> Given your theory above, approximately how much energy is lost per second?
> 
> If one assumes pure silica -- SiO2 (improbable, and part of it is
> iron anyway but I'd have to look up the exact composition -- turns
> out oxygen is in first place, silicon in third), one gets
> a count of 3 * (5.976*10^24 / (0.028 + 2*0.016)) * 6.022*10^23
> = 1.7994 * 10^50 atoms, though this could be off by an order of
> magnitude.
> 
> Since you're hypothesizing some energy loss, I want to know how much.

The only energy loss is from the stored fat you've been acumulating so
you can be better at kissing ass. It takes a lot of energy to kiss so
many asses. ...hahaha... And there are so many masters waiting to get
their asses kissed. ....hahahah... ....hahahah... ...HAHAHAHA....

Physics is so much Phucking Phun!  ...hahaha...

Louis Savain

The Silver Bullet: Why Software Is Bad and What We Can Do to Fix it
http://users.adelphia.net/~lilavois/Cosas/Reliability.htm