Actually its perfectly clear that your incoherent drivel is tripping you up. Whatever it is you are trying to define, its certainly not mass.It is obvious that you have absolutely no understanding of the nonlinear nature of relative mass in the new model.

Yes, and if we are adding 5kg to 3kg, we get 8kg.One kilogram is a name given to a lump of a chosen size. Then mathematically it is possible to call two of those lumps two kilograms.

5x + 3x = 8x WOW!

However, you still CANNOT add 5 kg to 3 seconds.

Like 5x + 3y, they are irreducible beyond that composite statement.

And in a statement of equalities - an equation - the units must equate, as I said. If there is an expression of time on one side, there must be an expression of time on the other.

Now you accept that its NOT mass you are talking about but a new derivative quality, a function of mass and time. And now "mass effect" = mass cubed over time squared. Mass is still mass, then, the same old mass, an actual, non relative quantity just like it always was, over there on the right hand side of your "mass effect" equation, the actual quantity you have decided to cube in inventing your new, utterly useless thingamejig called "mass effect".The unit of mass in the new model is m³/s². Mass in the new model should be called "mass effect" rather than just "mass".

No way around it. To fix your equation, you have to add back in exactly the same units that comprise G: d^3 * m^-1 * t^-2

Then we just change your (M + m)^2 back to Mm, and hey presto, its Newton again and it actually works.

You doofus!

11,621 - 11,640of 40,691 Comments Last updated22 min ago