Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ikeray
and i was quoting straight from wikipedia about the lb*g*ft/sec.
kg is a mass, lbs is a weight (being in constant acceleration you get weight from a mass). now whos the dumb one, the formula is always kg*g(gravitational force)*ft/sec, i just defined gravity as 9.8 in which you can formulate lbs from grams because we have the simple conversion for this. yes, i shouldve excluded gravity from the lb*ft/sec, but even still, it is STILL ft.lbs/sec, not lbs/ft. we would call it lbs/ft if thats what it really was, thats why we call it miles PER hour and not miles-hours, SEE HOW THAT WORKS!?!?!?!
|
okay, one: I didn't call you dumb, thanks
two: you quoted a wrong formula and trusted to think you could disrespect me unwarranted and expect me to take you serious? okay
even with what you're ranting about, in the function of torque application the distance for which you're using acceleration (i have no idea why) would only reduce to force applied even if no acceleration is seen and still have a torque application.
why are you bring 9.8meters per second into the equation of POUNDS operating on a lever at a certain distance. even if that fulcrum doesn't move...
basically what you're telling is that if the bolt, flywheel, wheel, whatever, doesn't turn, no torque is be applied to it. there is a force there operating on the object and that measurement force is from 1 foot and the force unit we're dealing with is pounds...at 1 foot there is this many pounds...just like for that one HOUR, that many miles have been covered.
wait i just realised you're trying to argue with me about a slash and a dot and the order when in actuality they are the same thing. You know to divide a fraction you multiply by the inverse right?
im going to let you have fun continue to "argue" i have no reason to debate with you
EDIT:
thanks mike for the extra back/info
much apprciated.