Looking at a couple of old concepts in a new light...
With regard to REAL power losses P in a conductor of total resistance R we have as a function of current:
P = I2×R
Current or the flow of uncharged electrons, a rotating unit of space, over a period of time is observed as a speed or more specifically the speed of light, c.
The electron being a spatial displacement moves through the time of atom and not through the interstitial space as space to time constitutes motion and space to space does not.
The atom being a temporal rotation exists within the unit space boundary (time region) and so motion in this region (equivalent space) would be measured as a second-order relationship. The 1-dimensional translation in the TR would be seen in equivalent space as a second-power form, 1/c → c2
Mass (t3/s3) being resistance (t2/s3) for a period of time, we can substitute m/t for R above. Current being a speed can be replaced by its true speed, c.
P = I2×m/t → P×t = I2×m → E = mc2
Similar to our understanding that energy, momentum, and mass or 1-dimensional, 2-dimensional, and 3-dimensional inverse speeds or put otherwise are measured in ratio against 1/c unit.
1D: E / (1/c)
2D: p / (1/c2)
3D: m / (1/c3)
E / (1/c) = m / (1/c3) → E = mc2
Mass as Integrated Power
Mass as Integrated Power
Infinite Rider on the Big Dogma
Re: Mass as Integrated Power
I agree with that, but how to prove that m=Rt to a normie ?
The product isomorphism of E=½mv2 and E=½Li2 and E=Rti2 doesn't cut it.
I have a a classical proof that mass dimensions are (t3/s3) but proving that m=Rt outside of RST framework eludes me.
Unit Analysis
Here we show m = Rt (mass is resistance for a given time)
We start with the understanding mass has natural units of t3/s3.
V (voltage or force) = I (current) x R (resistance)
Force is energy normalized to a single unit of clock space (1/s), whereas acceleration is speed normalized to a single unit of clock time (1/t). Energy (inverse speed) has units t/s, ergo force is t/s /s or t/s2. This makes sense as force and acceleration are conjugates: F = ma → m = F/a
Current is a speed (s/t).
F (t/s2) = I (s/t) x R → R = (t/s2) / (s/t) = t2/s3
Therefore, m (t3/s3) = R (t2/s3) x t
Unit analysis confirms.
A deeper understanding includes permittivity and permeability but again requires a more advanced understanding of RS2. That the audience is capable of simple dimensional analysis should be sufficient.
We start with the understanding mass has natural units of t3/s3.
V (voltage or force) = I (current) x R (resistance)
Force is energy normalized to a single unit of clock space (1/s), whereas acceleration is speed normalized to a single unit of clock time (1/t). Energy (inverse speed) has units t/s, ergo force is t/s /s or t/s2. This makes sense as force and acceleration are conjugates: F = ma → m = F/a
Current is a speed (s/t).
F (t/s2) = I (s/t) x R → R = (t/s2) / (s/t) = t2/s3
Therefore, m (t3/s3) = R (t2/s3) x t
Unit analysis confirms.
A deeper understanding includes permittivity and permeability but again requires a more advanced understanding of RS2. That the audience is capable of simple dimensional analysis should be sufficient.
Infinite Rider on the Big Dogma
Re: Unit Analysis
A normie can understand the dimensional analysis of F = ma and V=iR, so there is no problem here.user737 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 27, 2025 8:52 pm Force is energy normalized to a single unit of clock space (1/s), whereas acceleration is speed normalized to a single unit of clock time (1/t). Energy (inverse speed) has units t/s, ergo force is t/s /s or t/s2. This makes sense as force and acceleration are conjugates: F = ma → m = F/a
With a classical proof that mass has the dimensions of (t3/s3) it is trivial to prove that force has the dimensions of (t/s2) and energy (t/s).
BUT it is not trivial to prove that voltage is force nor that current is speed and you have not done that in your chain of reasoning. You just asserted it without proof.
That's just an assertion. If I could prove to a normie that current is a speed (s/t) outside of the RST conceptual framework then I could also prove that the voltage is a force (t/s2) and that Rt and inductance (L) are masses.
Unfortunately, I see no strong mathematical arguments that I could use to prove to a normie that current is speed. I wrote about this extensively in this thread.
P.S.
I do have a proof outside of RST that the dimensions of mass are (t3/s3).
Re: Mass as Integrated Power
Are you still thinking? ...or have you not recognized the lapse in your logic and summarily decided that my objections do not make sense and don't deserve a reply?