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