From: gehrab@gmail.com   
      
   On Thursday, November 2, 2023 at 3:17:24 AM UTC-5, Luigi Fortunati wrote:   
   This will be my last response on this topic, as you refuse to attempt to   
   understand reality. As such, this is becoming a waste of my time.   
      
   > Certainly, but the forces that act on a body also have another consequence:   
   they activate the body's resistance force!   
      
   Such an activation requires a mechanism. In a spring we have the Hooke's law   
   force that activates only when you displace a particle on a spring from   
   equilibrium. You suggest no such mechanism, and there is no physical evidence   
   for any such mechanism in    
   matter other than mass. Mass is completely well understood in classical   
   mechanics as the quantity of inertia, thus it goes by the name of inertial   
   mass. Your refusal to accept this tells me that you are no longer dealing with   
   reality.   
   >   
   > And vice versa, the body's (inertial) resistance force is activated *only*   
   when the external force intervenes.   
      
   Nonsense.   
      
   > Newton also says it: "A body exerts this force only, when another force,   
   impressed upon it, endeavors to change its condition; and the exercise of this   
   force may be considered both as resistance and impulse; it is resistance, in   
   so far as the body, for    
   maintaining its present state, withstands the force impressed; it is impulse,   
   in so far as the body, by not easily giving way to the impressed force of   
   another, endeavors, to change the state of that another. Resistance is usually   
   ascribed to bodies at    
   rest, and impulse to those in motion; but motion and rest, as commonly   
   conceived, are only relatively distinguished; nor are these bodies always   
   truly at rest, which commonly are taken to be so."   
      
   You suggest that inertia is a force. This makes no sense as solving the   
   equations of motion we would be multiplying by a new force and the end result   
   would be in units of Newton's squared, and they are not.   
   >   
      
      
   > You can understand this by looking at my animation where the bodies m1 and   
   m2 (before the collision) do not have to resist anything because no one is   
   accelerating them and, instead, during the collision they both have to resist   
   because they are    
   accelerating each other.   
      
   Your animations are not solutions of the equations, they are an artist   
   rendering. Thus, they are useless as a model.   
      
   > My animation demonstrates that there is a simultaneity between inertia and   
   electromagnetic forces.   
   >   
   > In fact, the electromagnetic forces are activated only during the collision,   
   that is, precisely at the moment in which both bodies m1 and m2 need a force   
   to be able to resist the mutual external acceleration.   
      
   You clearly have no understanding of the electromagnetic basis of friction.   
   The reason why you have friction is because of the interaction of atoms and   
   ions with each other electromagnetically. Atoms want to stick together, so as   
   an object moves it    
   experiences a force that tries to get the object to stay where it is. You   
   diagram does not even attempt to show how that works.   
   >   
   > This means that it is precisely the bodies m1 and m2 that use *their*   
   electromagnetic forces (what else if not?) to be able to oppose each other.   
      
   No, it is their differences in their initial states of momentum.   
   >   
   > In fact, in the lower part of my animation (despite there being contact   
   between m1 and m2) no electromagnetic force is activated because the inertias   
   do not activate them (not needing them).   
      
   As I said above, I am done wasting my time on this. You will never accept   
   reality. Good luck.   
      
   George   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)