And to think "Why'd he put a carriage return there, and what's with the underline?"
And, of course, quoting mangles it further.
[Moderated]175 did NOT hit the South tower.
- Thread starter SOMERLED
- Start date
- Status
And, of course, quoting mangles it further.
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
Once, after reading someone like Judy Wood rabbit on about dark soil at the WTC site, I hypothesised it was from blood mixing with the dust, and decided to calculate how much blood there would have been in the debris (based on how much blood is in an adult human X number of victims).
Part way through I realised what I was doing and... needless to say I didn't feel like continuing with the calculation.
-Gumboot
CurtC
Illuminator
Aaaaaaaahhhh. I had read it as "extension in mm = constant force in Newtons." I think most others here had as well.
By the way, it's not the forum that trims leading spaces, it's one of the basics of HTML. To retain multiple spaces in a web page, you have to use the non-breaking space character . But this forum does seem to convert the ampersand character, so I can't see anyway to do an in a post.
Kage
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- May 4, 2006
- Messages
- 455
I stand corrected. This does not change the fact that this fromula has nothing to do with a plane hitting a building.
Hooke's law is most often used in small displacement approximations, such as a pendulum swinging over a small angle. This comes from:
F = -dU/dx where U is the potential energy and x is the displacement.
This means that where U is a parabola, F = kx by integration. Assume that x0 is a local minimum of U and U has a taylor expansion:
U = U(a) + U'(x - a) + (1/2)U"(x - a)^2 + (1/6)U'''(x - a)^3 + ...
Since U(a) is a local minimum:
U = U(a) + (1/2)U"(x - a)^2 + (1/6)U'''(x - a)^3 + ...
as U'(x-a) = 0. Assume (x-a) is small st (x - a)^2 >> (x - a)^3
Then
U = U(a) + (1/2)U"(x - a)^2 and F = -dU/dx = - U"(x - a) which is Hooke's law.
Contrast this scenario (small deviations around a local minimum) with that of a large jet plowing into the side of a building and you can clearly see how ridiculus an appeal to hooke's law is. Even more foolish than the clowdy day claim or the pedophilia allegations. Even if you were to hit a WTC sized slinky with a plane that has a giant spring on its nose hooke's law would probably not come up.
Ah, that almost makes sense now.
In that case Malcolm, perhaps you'd like to explain why you didn't just say that in the first place instead of insisting over and over again that we were wrong and you were right? You could have saved about 10 pages of making yourself look like an idiot if you'd just explained you were having trouble formatting your posts.
All that aside, perhaps you would now like to explain exactly how you are trying to involve Hooke's law with electronics.
In that case Malcolm, perhaps you'd like to explain why you didn't just say that in the first place instead of insisting over and over again that we were wrong and you were right? You could have saved about 10 pages of making yourself look like an idiot if you'd just explained you were having trouble formatting your posts.
All that aside, perhaps you would now like to explain exactly how you are trying to involve Hooke's law with electronics.
VespaGuy
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
- Messages
- 1,034
Thread on posting really cool mathematical stuff. Latex isn't just a fetish.
Great stuff!
There you go Malcolm!
Check out that thread and learn how to post mathematical equations in a coherent fashion. Since you're retired, I'm sure you can find a few moments out of your day to read that thread, and since your a Mensa member, you shouldn't have any difficulty at all learning how to format equations correctly from now on.
Khyron
Scholar
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2006
- Messages
- 95
Cuddles - Malcolm is actually giving a "decent" equation (though still mixing force and distance measurements) in very poor notation.
8 = 2
4
it's a pity he doesn't know that, in a normal text, this would be presented as 8/4=2 to avoid confusion.
8 = 2
4
it's a pity he doesn't know that, in a normal text, this would be presented as 8/4=2 to avoid confusion.
Belz...
Fiend God
The wood vs steel thing is one of the best examples of how the truthers' much vaunted "common sense" fails. Steel IS stronger in their mind, so it cannot possibly be worse off than wood in a fire. This is the same line of thought that makes people think that diamonds are invincible because they are the "hardest" substance, which is why we have Emma Frost. Not that we don't like her, of course.
So THAT'S what he meant ?
Why didn't he just say so right off the bat ?
One has to wonder if he wasn't just feeding off the resulting animosity.
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
Belz has kindly provided me a link to a news article about a man committing suicide by leaping from the Empire State Building which indicates that it did indeed have opening windows. I think it is safe to assume additional windows in the ESB also opened.
-Gumboot
-Gumboot
Belz...
Fiend God
It's also cause for celebration. Malcolm got something right!
Well Gumboot, seeing as how you are from NZ, I'm not surprised you haven't seen too many skyscrapers.
But seriously, is this thread over yet? I don't believe Mr Kirkman has successfully defended any of his assertions. Not science, engineering, aeronautics, pyrotechnics, spelling, grammar nor etymology.
BTW Malcom you were wrong about why Aluminium is spelled Aluminum in the US.
Is there some other subject you'd care to try your hand at?
Tirdun
Muse
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2006
- Messages
- 637
If no one else posts ahead of me, this will be the 2010th post in this thread. Two thousand ten posts. Think on that.
The pattern so far has been:
- Malcolm posts an easy target for debunking.
- The assembled thread debunks him
- Malcolm ignores, denies, and ridicules and puts up another or even the same target.
There is no deviation in this. We scatter to find information to refute each easy target, fire accurately and nod in satisfaction, only to find that our straw target has been propped back up. There can be no victory, my friends, we are bogged down in a quagmire of misinformation and avoidance. He has already declared his fortress unassailable.
The pattern so far has been:
- Malcolm posts an easy target for debunking.
- The assembled thread debunks him
- Malcolm ignores, denies, and ridicules and puts up another or even the same target.
There is no deviation in this. We scatter to find information to refute each easy target, fire accurately and nod in satisfaction, only to find that our straw target has been propped back up. There can be no victory, my friends, we are bogged down in a quagmire of misinformation and avoidance. He has already declared his fortress unassailable.
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2007
- Messages
- 24,133
Malcolm, out of curiosity, why do think that we (meaning those that have been arguing with you in this thread) do not believe that it was an inside job? You've explained your own side here, and I don't recall seeing this question brought up before although, mind you, this thread is now like 2000 posts long. Do you think we're naive, mislead, stubborn, paid-off or something else?
ktesibios
Worthless Aging Hippie
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2002
- Messages
- 1,493
Analog meter movements commonly work by using the field produced by an electromagnet carrying the current to be measured, interacting with the field from a permanent magnet (or another elctromagnet), to produce a force which deflects the pointer against a restoring force produced by a spring. The spring constant is one of the factors which determine the calibration of the meter movement. That's probably what Malcom is getting at.
Of course, this has nothing to do with smashing an airplane into a building. Breaking a piece of metal necessarily means straining it far beyond the part of its stress-strain plot where it behaves like a linear, Hookian spring.
tacodaemon
Muse
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2006
- Messages
- 571
Corrugated:
Malcolm -- compare that to this image of what the actual exterior walls of the WTC towers looked like:
See how that's not waves of solid metal but columns of aluminum-covered steel with glass in between them? That's quite a bit different.
Belz...
Fiend God
Is this what you call "corrugated", Malcolm ?
HawksFan
Muse
Can someone wake me when we get to the part about the ex-military "bad boys"? I'd really like to see his proof of these.
I was going to clarify the corrugated thing as well, but I figured it was such an insignificant wrong amongst so many, many larger wrongs that it didn't really warrent attention.
I was going to clarify the corrugated thing as well, but I figured it was such an insignificant wrong amongst so many, many larger wrongs that it didn't really warrent attention.
SOMERLED
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- May 30, 2007
- Messages
- 1,358
The photograph is a crude fake. The pertinent quetion is,
Why should you post a knowingly fake document?
Well, HawksFan, I've pointed out at least a half-dozen times that his falsehood about the imaginary armored planes has been exposed. I've asked that he apologize for resorting to outright lies to promote his thoroughly debunked canards. I have a feeling he won't be apologizing.
Remember, if he could acknowledge error, he wouldn't be what he is.
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2005
- Messages
- 24,532
It's also cause for celebration. Malcolm got something right!
Well, let's not bring out the cake just yet. Hooke's Law is that for an ideal spring, the extension is proportional to the force applied. This law can be expressed in the equation:
X = -k F
where k is a characteristic of a given spring, the spring constant.
Please note, though, extension and force are both vector quantities. Vector division isn't for the faint of heart, so I question the merits of Malcom's X/F presentation.
- Status