Duane,
The “Mass” I refer to as a primitive is
interpreted as relativistic mass, which has an energy equivalent (not rest
mass). This allows all fundamental particles including photons to be
instances of “PhysicalObject”.
Of course, each atom will also have a characteristic Mass
– though the different isotopes will have different masses. A
Massive object in a normal gravitational field will have a “Weight”,
depending on the strength of the field where it is measured (varies with
location and altitude). Weight is proportional to but different from
Mass. What is referred to a “atomic weight” is actually
atomic Mass – just a terminology thing.
I’m not sure if I have addressed the question.
Pat
Patrick Cassidy
MICRA, Inc.
908-561-3416
cell: 908-565-4053
cassidy@xxxxxxxxx
From:
ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Duane
Nickull
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 1:57 PM
To: [ontolog-forum]; ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Foundation Ontology Primitives
Pat:
(I think I am on the other Pat’s list too ;-p)
On 2/2/10 10:50 AM, "Patrick Cassidy" <pat@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I would consider "Mass" as primitive
A quick question (this is relevant to something I am working on today)
Could “Mass” (the concept as you have suggested as a primitive
here) be expressed in a taxonomy equally as either an Atomic Mass or scoped to
a terrestrial gravitational field based on the taxonomy authors scope or
domain?
Duane
---
Adobe LiveCycle Enterprise Architecture - http://www.adobe.com/products/livecycle/
My TV Show - http://tv.adobe.com/show/duanes-world/
My Blog – http://technoracle.blogspot.com/
My Band – http://22ndcenturyofficial.com/
Twitter – http://twitter.com/duanechaos