what do u think about this.. review of some previously discussed topics..
- a point multiplied by itself.. I guess because they love each other makes a line.. a line multiplied by itself makes a square, a square multiplied by itself makes a cube.. a cube multiplied by itself makes time..? c is the speed of expansion of three dimensions c times itself is the three dimensions multiplied by itself.. or it it the 4 dimensions multiplied by itself.. because it loves to multiply and be fruitful.. if u stick some mass in all this and watch it explode u get energy.. cause they all get sick of each other and get angry.. look at what Daniel Fitzpatrick says.. university's asleep at the switch..Hamel's weight into speed.. falling into itself. it's own gravity... .. inertia.. Inertia is the resistance of any physical object to a change in its state of motion or rest It is represented numerically by an object's mass..?? bending space causes it to fall in on the bend... antigravity can be exhibited not maybe because it is antigravity.. but because, u create another gravity well u fall into.. counteracting the one u don't want..also look more closely at what is a scalar and a vector in a very abstract way.. speed a scalar maybe because of the abstract time inherent.. vector movement..
The mass of a body determines the momentum P of the body at given velocity v; it is a proportionality factor in the formula:
- P = mv
The factor m is referred to as inertial mass.
But mass as related to 'inertia' of a body can be defined also by the formula:
- F = ma
Here, F is force, m is mass, and a is acceleration.
By this formula, the greater its mass, the less a body accelerates under given force. Masses m defined by the formula (1) and (2) are equal because the formula (2) is a consequence of the formula (1) if mass does not depend on time and speed. Thus, "mass is the quantitative or numerical measure of body’s inertia, that is of its resistance to being accelerated".
This meaning of a body's inertia therefore is altered from the original meaning as "a tendency to maintain momentum" to a description of the measure of how difficult it is to change the momentum of a body.
The only difference there appears to be between inertial mass and gravitational mass is the method used to determine them.
Gravitational mass is measured by comparing the force of gravity of an unknown mass to the force of gravity of a known mass. This is typically done with some sort of balance. The beauty of this method is that no matter where, or on what planet you are, the masses will always balance out because the gravitational field present for each object will be the same. As long as there is a gravitational field, a balance will yield a reliable mass measurement. This does break down near super massive objects such as black holes and neutron stars due to the steep gradient of the gravitational field around such objects. It also breaks down in weightless environments, due to the fact that no matter what objects are compared, it will yield a balanced reading.
Inertial mass is found by applying a known net force to an unknown mass, measuring the resulting acceleration, and applying Newton's Second Law, m = F/a. This gives an accurate value for mass, limited only by the accuracy of the measurements. When astronauts need to be measured in the weightlessness of free fall, they actually find their inertial mass in a special chair called a body mass measurement device (BMMD).
The interesting thing is that, physically, no difference has been found between gravitational and inertial mass. Many experiments have been performed to check the values and the experiments always agree to within the margin of error for the experiment. Einstein used the fact that gravitational and inertial mass were equal to begin his Theory of General Relativity in which he postulated that gravitational mass was the same as inertial mass, and that the acceleration of gravity is a result of a 'valley' or slope in the space-time continuum that masses 'fell down' much as pennies spiral around a hole in the common donation toy at a chain store. Dennis Sciama later showed that the reaction force produced by the combined gravity of all matter in the universe upon an accelerating object is mathematically equal to the object's inertia , but this would only be a workable physical explanation if by some mechanism the gravitational effects operated instantaneously.
Source of Inertia
There is no single accepted theory that explains the source of Inertia. Various efforts by notable physicists such as Ernst Mach (see Mach's principle), Albert Einstein, D Sciama, and Bernard Haisch have all run into significant criticisms from more recent theorists. For recent treatments of the issue see C. Johan Masreliez (2006) and Vesselin Petkov (2009).
 Rotational inertia
Another form of inertia is rotational inertia (→ moment of inertia), which refers to the fact that a rotating rigid body maintains its state of uniform rotational motion. Its angular momentum is unchanged, unless an external torque is applied; this is also called conservation of angular momentum. Rotational inertia depends on the object remaining structurally intact as a rigid body, and also has hidden practical consequences. For example, a gyroscope uses the property that it resists any change in the axis of rotation.
I have some more to say, but this the safe stuff that is pretty much already out there.. without giving away a few leads and some things that are new..