Mass resistance to acceleration.

[benj]

What am I crazy, I am talking to a baboon!

You are the baboon. Too bad the rest of us don't speak baboon.
Of course they accelerate slower. Without interia, ANY force would
instantly accelerate it to the speed of light (or close).

Wow, don't you speak Baboonish? Let see.
How can they accelerate slower? It depends of their Mass? LOL
In free-fall there are NO FORCES applied, you know the name
"free-fall"
You speak Baboonish very well after all

Insane babble dumber than Wormley. Even the Worm has heard of gravity.
You haven't.
Not even up to baboon level.

Hey stoopid. You are attacking me by puerile game of insults. You are
not relating to the PROOF on your STUPIDITY I gave you above.
This means that you lost and are admitting forcefully your DEFEAT.
The proof stays over there. YOU ARE A STOOPID BABOON. And this is NOT an
insult. Please remark! LOL

Sam already explained it to you. You are STILL dumber than Wormley. No
offense.

[Wizard-Of-Oz]

When I see F=ma, what this means to me is that "The value of the
vector force is numerically equal to the product of the value of
the mass multiplied by the value of the vector acceleration." Not
"Force is acceleration of mass."

Exactly. However, a direct proportionality between force and both of
them.

For equally accellerating objects, the force is directly proportional
to the mass

And not direct proportional to the Acceleration??

"directLY" .. not "direct"

And yes, not directly proportional to acceleration, because I said for
equally accelerating objects.

The acceleration is the factor of proportionality between mass and force
in that case

For objects of the same mass, the force is directly proportional to
the acceleration.

And not direct proportional to the Mass!?

"directLY" .. not "direct"

And yes, not directly proportional to acceleration, because I said for
object of the same mass

The mass is the factor of proportionality between acceleration and force
in that case .
It's not that hard .. try to keep up.