This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment Yes, your logic right, but the formula I would use would be F =3D ma. = Brian -----Original Message----- From: Brian Trout <btrout@desupernet.net> To: pianotech@ptg.org <pianotech@ptg.org> Date: Monday, 29 November 1999 12:32 Subject: Re: String breakage in relation to hammer mass =20 =20 Hi Brian, =20 Not to be obnoxious here, but perhaps the formula may have some = relevance. =20 Although we're not dealing with parameters of light speed, the = formula does give a very basic premise that will apply to much of the = physical world. =20 In this formula, it is demonstrated that an increase in mass will = also bring about an increase in energy if the formula is to remain = valid. Any change on one side of the "=3D" sign would also need to be = reflected on the other side of the "=3D" sign to maintain the ratio = implied. ... Just thinkin' in cyberspace... =20 Hope you're having a nice weekend. It's been a busy one here. =20 Best wishes,=20 =20 Brian Trout Quarryville, PA btrout@desupernet.net =20 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Brian Holden=20 To: pianotech@ptg.org=20 Sent: Sunday, November 28, 1999 2:32 PM Subject: Re: String breakage in relation to hammer mass =20 =20 PS, Jim's formula: E =3D mc2 (energy =3D mass x speed of = light2) would have little to do with the breaking string problem = methinks - BH.=20 -----Original Message----- From: M J & L V Ashby <mjashby@xtra.co.nz> To: Piano List <pianotech@ptg.org> Date: Sunday, 28 November 1999 21:32 Subject: String breakage in relation to hammer mass =20 =20 If a hammer is unusually heavy will it contribute to string = breakage? =20 Michael=20 ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/eb/8c/e5/4d/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC