Who killed Meredith Kercher? part 23

[NotEvenWrong]

Could it be that PGPs practice physics without a license? Or even one introductory course including Newtonian dynamics

The one core personality trait of all hardcore guilters (by hardcore I mean the ones who are involved in the anti-Amanda propaganda campaign and are still writing conspiracy theories on any internet venue they can find) is the belief that they are experts in anything and everything after reading a blog post about it one time. Then they come up with these arguments that are completely wrong in every way they can possibly be wrong, yet they state them with authority. And the other ill children lap up the arguments like the mentally ill puppies they are. Then the arguments get repeated, here for instance. And that's how the propaganda and misinformation gets spread -- a bunch of idiots acting like experts spreading their gospel of stupid to mentally ill failures who then feel it is their job to spread the Gospel of Stupid (in caps now because it has become canon at this point; see look it's official it's on themurderofmez.internettroll.lifefailures.com) to every corner of the internet.

Case in point: Vixen's physics calculations. Jesus.

 

[Mike1711]

Let us know when you come across the following:



In a foot system, it is OK to convert into inches, as the distance at 'stop' level is often a small fraction of the distance travelled, hence it makes sense to convert 6 feet into 72 inches, if the stop distance is a fraction of an inch. (This is just a nicetie, and of course, not mandatory.) the weight of the rock was expressed in lbs for similar reason.

How do you think the empire managed before it went metric?

My word!!! Your physics is not just bad, it is non-existent. The calculations are gibberish. It's got nothing to do with metric or imperial units. It's to do with your complete ignorance of basic physics.

The distance traveled has zero to do with any calculation of force. What is important is the time taken to travel a specific distance (velocity). This gives the rock its momentum (mass multiplied by velocity). It's matters not one iota whether the rock travelled from the moon or was propelled from a missile launcher 1mm from its target. It is velocity at impact and mass of rock that you need to address. The glass will resist the momentum of the rock. The ability of the glass to resist the momentum of rock will give you the deceleration of the rock and thereafter you can calculate the distance the rock travels after impact (taking into account height of impact of glass above final resting position after impact).

Try again while I fire up the the popcorn. This should be fun!

 

[Vixen]

You still have not shown that the rock was traveling 28 mph.

No, I asked YOU to show it, lapping up all the crib sheet factoids. Samson said it was 28mph, based on Olympic level female shot putters.

 

[Vixen]

The shard was embedded as a result of this throw is my point. It looks like considerable velocity was achieved. The important point to be made is that in a staging from within the room that velocity is quite unnecessary, and IMO far more difficult to achieve, remembering the space available for the wind up between wall and inward opening shutter window combo.

Was it actually embedded? AIUI, it is simply a noticeable dent in the woodwork, with the paint chipped.

BTW have you seen some of these 'female' shot putters? Most have more upper body strength, fat and muscle than a Dallas Cowboys quarterback. You seriously expect us to imagine Rudy spinning around with the paving slab against his neck, before thrusting it skywards?

Well, as you consider Steven Avery, Jeremy Bamber and co to be poor little innocents, maybe it is not so remarkable.

 

[Vixen]

My word!!! Your physics is not just bad, it is non-existent. The calculations are gibberish. It's got nothing to do with metric or imperial units. It's to do with your complete ignorance of basic physics.

The distance traveled has zero to do with any calculation of force. What is important is the time taken to travel a specific distance (velocity). This gives the rock its momentum (mass multiplied by velocity). It's matters not one iota whether the rock travelled from the moon or was propelled from a missile launcher 1mm from its target. It is velocity at impact and mass of rock that you need to address. The glass will resist the momentum of the rock. The ability of the glass to resist the momentum of rock will give you the deceleration of the rock and thereafter you can calculate the distance the rock travels after impact (taking into account height of impact of glass above final resting position after impact).

Try again while I fire up the the popcorn. This should be fun!

Since the velocity is an unknown factor - certainly not 28 mph as claimed by Abbaddon and Samson - we can still calculate the minimum level of force, based on simply letting the rock go, and this will be weight, in pounds, times distance travelled divided by halt distance, to give a good idea of the minimum force of impact in pound-force. (Hence the pounds.)

It is clear, a limestone/sandstone slab of 9lbs 4oz will land at a massive force, the greater the drop, the heavier the force (an everyday object falling from a tower block can kill on impact anyone walking underneath).

No doubt we can calculate velocity from an imputed parabolic height of the throw by use of quadratic equation, but do you know what? Whilst an ordinary person might well be able to sling the slab straight ahead using two hands for maximum force, there is no way Rudy managed to sling it over hand to any height above his head, which is what is being claimed.

 

[Samson]

Was it actually embedded? AIUI, it is simply a noticeable dent in the woodwork, with the paint chipped.

BTW have you seen some of these 'female' shot putters? Most have more upper body strength, fat and muscle than a Dallas Cowboys quarterback. You seriously expect us to imagine Rudy spinning around with the paving slab against his neck, before thrusting it skywards?

Well, as you consider Steven Avery, Jeremy Bamber and co to be poor little innocents, maybe it is not so remarkable.

It was embedded deeply.
You are stuck with this to deal with. My point is that we know the maximum speed for the rock is 28 mph. There is also a minimum unknown speed, but it will be not much less because of this evidence.

Steven Avery and Jeremy Bamber are innocent. There is nothing surprising in that, because the internet discussions follow the same path as the Knox.
People rely on the conviction to take a position, but can't and won't explain the specific evidence that they use to reach their views. On the other hand those who understand a wrongful conviction always point to specific science, logistics and alibi evidence to show these people could not have been involved in the crimes for which they end up being convicted.
There are scores of such cases, all resembling each other in the key pattern.

 

[NotEvenWrong]

No doubt we can calculate velocity from an imputed parabolic height of the throw by use of quadratic equation, but do you know what? Whilst an ordinary person might well be able to sling the slab straight ahead using two hands for maximum force, there is no way Rudy managed to sling it over hand to any height above his head, which is what is being claimed.

Yeah, why actually do the calculation (correctly. lol) or, ya know, test it? Then we may be able to conclusively prove it is relatively easy to throw a 9 pound rock overhead, and we don't want that. Examining actual evidence is scary when you can just make stuff up as you go. Amanda is a witch after all, thus we already know the break in was staged.

PS -- a male shot is 16 pounds. In high school it is TWELVE pounds. The rock is ~25% lighter than a male high school shot. Good high school *boys* can throw this 50 feet. You are claiming it is impossible for a grown athletic man that played semi-pro bball to throw a 9 pound rock 6 something feet. This is yet another example of your brain failing to work properly. Forget an example of a peer reviewed work endorsing Stefanoni. Can you provide an example of you saying a single thing that is right, ever? Does not even have to be from this forum, as that will be an immense challenge.

 

[Numbers]

Momentum equation for the broken window:

mass_rock_before *velocity_rock_before = mass_rock_after*velocity_rock_after + mass_window shards*velocity_window shards + losses due to energy lost in fracturing window etc.

 

[Bill Williams]

Let us know when you come across the following:



In a foot system, it is OK to convert into inches, as the distance at 'stop' level is often a small fraction of the distance travelled, hence it makes sense to convert 6 feet into 72 inches, if the stop distance is a fraction of an inch. (This is just a nicetie, and of course, not mandatory.) the weight of the rock was expressed in lbs for similar reason.

How do you think the empire managed before it went metric?

A "foot system"? Haha haha. I knew podiatry would figure in this eventually.

 

[Mike1711]

A "foot system"? Haha haha. I knew podiatry would figure in this eventually.

Once again, Vixen puts her foot in it. Fisiks 4 the PGP foot soldier...an amazing feet.

 

[Vixen]

Yeah, why actually do the calculation (correctly. lol) or, ya know, test it? Then we may be able to conclusively prove it is relatively easy to throw a 9 pound rock overhead, and we don't want that. Examining actual evidence is scary when you can just make stuff up as you go. Amanda is a witch after all, thus we already know the break in was staged.

PS -- a male shot is 16 pounds. In high school it is TWELVE pounds. The rock is ~25% lighter than a male high school shot. Good high school *boys* can throw this 50 feet. You are claiming it is impossible for a grown athletic man that played semi-pro bball to throw a 9 pound rock 6 something feet. This is yet another example of your brain failing to work properly. Forget an example of a peer reviewed work endorsing Stefanoni. Can you provide an example of you saying a single thing that is right, ever? Does not even have to be from this forum, as that will be an immense challenge.

No. I said no way was the velocity 28 mph, and at such a close range.

 

[abaddon]

No. I said no way was the velocity 28 mph, and at such a close range.

Are you saying that if the range were longer, the speed could be achieved?

How much longer would the range need to be, in your opinion?

 

[bagels]

Perhaps I need to add rocket engines onto the rock in my PGP illustration, for all that post-throw acceleration that has to occur.

 

[Numbers]

Momentum equation for the broken window:

mass_rock_before *velocity_rock_before = mass_rock_after*velocity_rock_after + mass_window shards*velocity_window shards + losses due to energy lost in fracturing window etc.

Assumptions for the above:

mass_rock_before = mass_rock_after
velocity_window_shards_before = 0 (that's zero) because the window is intact and not moving with respect to the room.

 

[LondonJohn]

Perhaps I need to add rocket engines onto the rock in my PGP illustration, for all that post-throw acceleration that has to occur.

It's near incredible that any person with experience of the world around them could possibly think that an object could accelerate to a greater velocity in a given direction without a force being applied to that object!!!!

In this particular instance, Vixen extraordinarily seems to think that the rock might somehow have built up more horizontal speed the further it travelled (as evidenced by her incredulity that the rock might have attained 28mph* "over as little as 6ft6in"). I seriously don't even know where to start with such fatuous ignorance of basic physics. It's truly, truly, seriously laughable.

(And Vixen's earlier post about something like "it's OK to use inches cos the distances are small" or some such crap is also both unworthy of response and near-impossible to respond to, it's so so so wrong.....)


* Oh, and by the way Vixen, baseball pitchers routinely throw baseballs at velocities of almost 100mph. That's the speed at which the ball leaves the pitcher's hand, Vixen. The ball does not gain horizontal velocity the further it travels from the pitcher's hand, Vixen (can't believe I even have to write that!). In fact, the horizontal velocity of the ball decreases slightly the further it travels from the pitcher's hand, owing to a force applied counter to the direction of travel by drag from air molecules. But how can a baseball, at a distance of just 4 inches from a pitcher's hand, be travelling at almost 100mph, Vixen????!!!!! It's black magic, I tells ya!!!!

 

[Numbers]

Momentum equation for the broken window:

mass_rock_before *velocity_rock_before = mass_rock_after*velocity_rock_after + mass_window shards*velocity_window shards + losses due to energy lost in fracturing window etc.

Assumptions for the above:

mass_rock_before = mass_rock_after
velocity_window_shards_before = 0 (that's zero) because the window is intact and not moving with respect to the room.

 

[LondonJohn]

Momentum equation for the broken window:

mass_rock_before *velocity_rock_before = mass_rock_after*velocity_rock_after + mass_window shards*velocity_window shards + losses due to energy lost in fracturing window etc.

Careful conflating energy and momentum!

Conservation of momentum does not take account of energy transfers. In our example, all we are looking at is motion in the velocity vector of the direction of travel of the rock when it hit the window (which, let's say for the sake of simplicity, was exactly horizontal and perpendicular - which, if the rock was thrown in a slightly upward direction, might actually have been its real direction of travel when it hit the window....).

The momentum in the horizontal perpendicular vector at the point of impact was represented by the mass of the rock multiplied by the impact velocity of the rock (m^rv(impact)^r). This is the quantity that must be preserved. As you correctly say, we must add up the mv components of all the moving elements (where, importantly and critically, "v" is strictly the component of velocity in the direction of the impact direction of the rock).

We must deal with the interior shutter not by thinking about energy transfer, but by considering its movement. Unfortunately in the case of the interior shutter those calculations are exceptionally difficult, since the shutter was hinged, and angular momentum must be taken into account as a result (the impact caused the shutter to rotate around its hinge rather than set off in a straight line). But it's still an "mv" type of calculation, expressed in kgm units.

And all the components of momentum in this given direction of all the moving elements after impact MUST equal m^rv(impact)^r. Since the (relatively) high-mass rock loses a significant portion of its velocity (and thus momentum) post-impact (and a small piece of its mass, but that mass has velocity and momentum too, remember), this must be exactly compensated by the sum of momentums of all the other moving objects post-impact (in that specific direction, remember). The relatively far lower mass of each flying piece of glass from the window indicates why the velocity of those pieces is likely to be significantly higher than the impact velocity of the rock.

As I said earlier, the proper calculations (based on a certain set of starting conditions) could be done. They would be difficult to do, owing primarily to the twin problems of the rotating internal shutter and the accurate modelling of the dispersal of glass fragments post-impact. At the moment I don't feel inclined to do those calculations, but I might in the future.

 

[Vixen]

The analysis of the window breakage by Ron Hendry is useful.



Source: http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/RonHendry------2.html

In his eagerness to race to the defence of Amanda, Ron has made several unwarranted assumptions:

1. He assumes that the remains of window smashing were left untouched by the person/s who broke it.

2. He assumes the shards on the window sill are where the shards fell on impact. He doesn't consider they could have been placed there later, say someone looking out the window, might brush them aside.

3. He states that if the window was smashed from inside there would be shards on the ground outside. He assumes the window would have been shut.

4. Ron's intellectual disingenuity becomes clear when he considers the window may have been smashed whilst part open. However, he stipulates this must have been at an angle of 45 degrees to the window wall, an assumption he doesn't explain his reasoning for.

5. Prosecutor experts estbalished the window was open at an obligque angle, with the inner shutter behind it, which explain why it took the impact, but with no shards outside.

6. Ron says the outter shutter would have had shards of glass embedded in its inner side, yet it doesn't. Again, he takes it for granted, that if thrown inside the room, the window would have been shut.

7. He assumes the perps did not touch the rock again and where the rock was found was where it had naturally come to rest.

8. In addition, he says glass will fly where it's distributed, glass being brittle. However, when a window pane is broken, the whole structure of the window pane is undermined and glass that was merely shattered, above the hole, might well fall out in a straight line downwards, as a consequence of a lack of infrastructure, such as the putty coming loose, or a crack or distortion in the window frame.


I would suggest the reason the window was opened before smashing it, was (a) to give the appearance it had been smashed from the outside, hence the rock had to smash the outer pane, and (b) to avoid the rock sailing straight out of the window.

 

[Vixen]

It's near incredible that any person with experience of the world around them could possibly think that an object could accelerate to a greater velocity in a given direction without a force being applied to that object!!!!

In this particular instance, Vixen extraordinarily seems to think that the rock might somehow have built up more horizontal speed the further it travelled (as evidenced by her incredulity that the rock might have attained 28mph* "over as little as 6ft6in"). I seriously don't even know where to start with such fatuous ignorance of basic physics. It's truly, truly, seriously laughable.

(And Vixen's earlier post about something like "it's OK to use inches cos the distances are small" or some such crap is also both unworthy of response and near-impossible to respond to, it's so so so wrong.....)


* Oh, and by the way Vixen, baseball pitchers routinely throw baseballs at velocities of almost 100mph. That's the speed at which the ball leaves the pitcher's hand, Vixen. The ball does not gain horizontal velocity the further it travels from the pitcher's hand, Vixen (can't believe I even have to write that!). In fact, the horizontal velocity of the ball decreases slightly the further it travels from the pitcher's hand, owing to a force applied counter to the direction of travel by drag from air molecules. But how can a baseball, at a distance of just 4 inches from a pitcher's hand, be travelling at almost 100mph, Vixen????!!!!! It's black magic, I tells ya!!!!

Baseball pitchers have it down to a fine art in how to improve their thrust, which includes improving upper body effectiveness and strenght and pitching at just the right angle.

A six oz ball hit by a hard baseball bat can indeed reach 100 mph.

Perhaps there's some kind of mumbo-jumbo black magic that causes a 10lb paving slab-shaped object to do same.

 

[Vixen]

Are you saying that if the range were longer, the speed could be achieved?

How much longer would the range need to be, in your opinion?

Take Gallileo: drop a heavy object and a light object (perhaps a penny) from the leaning tower of Pisa and let us know which of the two falls nearest to the point from which it was dropped.