Re: A89: Light Speed

To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: Re: A89: Light Speed
From: Rob Smith <rob@kormoc.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 21:08:45 -0500
In-Reply-To: <OE41XXUv1MJ3G9Vbj2l00000cb9@hotmail.com>
References: <6e.6adaf87.278b941e@aol.com> <000c01c079c1$eb6cd0c0$76a4fea9@oemcomputer>
Reply-To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org


Slashdot article http://slashdot.org/articles/99/02/18/0832249_F.shtml
At 1/8/2001 06:49 PM, you wrote:
>i don't know if it's applicable to say gravity 'has no mass'. gravity 
>isn't something you measure in mass. it's like saying my certain kind of 
>force is at a speed of zero. force doesn't have a speed component, so it's 
>irrelevant. the 'no mass' topic comes into play when you're talking about 
>an actual object that has a mass of 0. like a neutrino (almost 0, but not 
>quite).

References:

Re: A89: Light Speed

From: JayEll64@aol.com

Re: A89: Light Speed

From: "Cullan" <Cullan@calc.org>

Re: A89: Light Speed

From: "Brian Taylor" <jodokaast@hotmail.com>