 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
> light years measure distance...
Time, speed, and distance.
--
Ken Tyler - 1300+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken wrote in message <38996327.5E5FAB92@pacbell.net>...
>
>> light years measure distance...
>
>Time, speed, and distance.
>
???????????????
Explain please
Gail
*******************************************************************
* gsh### [at] monotix coza * ERROR: COFFEE.COM not found *
* http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~gail/ * Insert cup and press any key *
*******************************************************************
* Definition of an upgrade: Take the old bugs out, put new ones in*
*******************************************************************
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
:> light years measure distance...
: Time, speed, and distance.
Nope, only distance.
In the same way newtons measure force, not weight, distance and time.
--
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The weight is expressed in Newtons but the mass in Kg :).
But you are right for light year this is only for distance,
1 light year is the distance that the light do in 1 year.
This is roughly 3*10^8 (m/s)*(3600*24*365)(s)=3*10^8 * 31,536*10^6
=9.46*10^15 meters =9.46*10^12 Km.
Fabian.
Nieminen Juha wrote:
>
> Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
> :> light years measure distance...
>
> : Time, speed, and distance.
>
> Nope, only distance.
> In the same way newtons measure force, not weight, distance and time.
>
> --
> main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
> ):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> The weight is expressed in Newtons but the mass in Kg :).
> But you are right for light year this is only for distance,
> 1 light year is the distance that the light do in 1 year.
> This is roughly 3*10^8 (m/s)*(3600*24*365)(s)=3*10^8 * 31,536*10^6
> =9.46*10^15 meters =9.46*10^12 Km.
My calculator gives it as 9,460,528,404,879.4 km
(3*10^8 is a *very* rough measure (and a year is 365.24 days))
How come people never use the word megameters or gigameters or terrameters?
--
Homepage: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
___ ______________________________
| \ |_ <dav### [at] faricynet>
|_/avid |ontaine <ICQ 55354965>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Fabian Brau <fab### [at] umhacbe> wrote:
: The weight is expressed in Newtons but the mass in Kg :).
Also forces are measured in Newtons.
An alternative measure for force is kilopond, which is 9.8 newtons.
--
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
>
> > The weight is expressed in Newtons but the mass in Kg :).
> > But you are right for light year this is only for distance,
> > 1 light year is the distance that the light do in 1 year.
> > This is roughly 3*10^8 (m/s)*(3600*24*365)(s)=3*10^8 * 31,536*10^6
> > =9.46*10^15 meters =9.46*10^12 Km.
>
> My calculator gives it as 9,460,528,404,879.4 km
> (3*10^8 is a *very* rough measure (and a year is 365.24 days))
> How come people never use the word megameters or gigameters or terrameters?
Yep but a good physicist can (must sometime) do good approximation to go
to the essence of the problem :)!
But since you like precision, here is
Tropical year (equinox to equinox) 31556925.2 secondes
Sideral year (fixed star to fixed star) 31558149.8 secondes
speed of light 299792458 m/s
So we have: 9,460,895,298,474,208.4 m (for Sideral year) :)
And the error compare to my first result is only about 9.46*10^(-3)%
The calculations are right but I am kidding :)
Fabian.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nieminen Juha wrote:
>
> Fabian Brau <fab### [at] umhacbe> wrote:
> : The weight is expressed in Newtons but the mass in Kg :).
>
> Also forces are measured in Newtons.
> An alternative measure for force is kilopond, which is 9.8 newtons.
>
I never doubted about your knowledge :)
Fabian
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hey sig. What's up?
I just got this issue tonight.
The article is fascinating and
occupying way too much of my
time. :)
The counterperson (could I *be*
more PC) said that this issue
was selling "like hotcakes."
On a personal note I add this.
My sculpture professor considered
Scientific America an 'Art' magazine.
Pretty cool, in my book.
Thanks again for your post.
Peter Warren
war### [at] hotmailcom
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>The counterperson (could I *be*
> more PC) said that this issue
> was selling "like hotcakes."
My only 3D magazine (Computer Graphics World) stopped coming to the store a
few months ago. Apparently, nobody in this friggin' country is into 3D, so
there is no demand for the magazine. The last one was the November 1999
issue. :(
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
