Originally Posted By: Orac


There are actually two kinetic energies not one

I am spining the bucket flat as a centrifuge so they have a kinetic energy realtive to that motion.

I am also spinning the bucket about the tether that is rotating on the centrifuge.

So each and every water molecule has two kinetic spins one flat around the centrifuge and one spinning about the bucket.


If space is absolute then the effect that the water sees in the bucket should be compound to both spins? It has to be space is absolute you are telling me.

If you took a water molecule somewhere out from the centre of the bucket it is describing some sort of circular spirograph pattern as it goes around in a circle on the flat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycloid)(http://www.math.psu.edu/dlittle/java/parametricequations/cycloid/)

Thats its weird kinetic motion path so whatever effect I am supposed to see is supposed to reflect that absolute motion and absolute kinetic energy in your finite world.

As I said in space or engineered enviroments I can even get rid of the bucket and just have the water with two completely different spins.

The net result can be described by considering the two spins in isolation I do not need to even talk about or consider the absolute motions and kinetics.

This is why the spinning bucket surface looks the same on the earth which is rotating about its axis while orbiting the sun and the sun is spinning about the galaxy centre. I need not consider any of those spins to talk about the bucket surface it is the same as if I was dead still in the middle of space with just the bucket spinning.

To put this in maths terms I have a vertical and horizontal vector or force diagram forming a triangle. The two individual force do not add up to the hypotenuse which is the compound force.

If the world was absolute I would need to consider the compound result I don't I can consider each spin in isolation.

You are linking kinetic energy which is movement to absolute space but then linking localized effects into that same kinetic energy and those localized effects are relative ... How can that be???.

Does that clarify how untenable your absolute world is?


Sorry, I thought the spinning and centrifuging to be two independent cases. You are incorporating both together. However, this, does not cause any problem. Now you are applying two different forces of rotation to the bucket; ie you are transferring energy simultaneously by two methods. The net effect would be the surface will remain more curved, because the minimum level of energy will be higher. The energy of each atom (vibrations, rotation, and translation), and the electromagnetic repulsion will be balanced the attractive forces and the centripetal forces. You need not consider the forces separately, and identify 'which force counters which force'.

In my theory balance of forces is the main thing to be considered. Forces does not impart energy, but only causes transfer of energy. Circular motion does not create centripetal force, except in the case of fundamental particles. And so centripetal force and absoluteness of space has no connection.