Split Thread The validity of classical physics (split from: DWFTTW)

[humber]

No, Humber, RossFW is not proposing any possibility of financial reward for you, nor for anybody else on this thread. The only person to make money out of the deal would be Mr Drela, or whoever else who might be chosen as expert to clear up the misunderstandings on this thread. He would gain $1000, which would be paid by whoever was wrong: you, or the others. Whoever is right, in the eyes of the expert, would lose or gain nothing. That sounds like a fair deal to me.

It's clear that we can't just ask Mark Drela to come here and sift through thousands of posts without offering to pay him something. You say that you're not afraid to support your case in front of him: show us that you mean it. You only lose your money if he says that you're wrong.

Yes, I am capable of concluding that. I mentioned that I would defend my position regardless of reward. The inference was yours.
Of course, you overlooked the other reasons in the process, Michael_C.

 

[John Freestone]

Since he's right behind me that's not difficult.
He says the dynamics are identical. All relative velocities, forces and therefore accelerations are identical (given a large enough treadmill).
In short: Equal relative velocities = Equal dynamics.

Have you told him he can't win?

 

[RossFW]

Those who haven't got the humility or patience to learn anything at all are destined to look very stupid.

John,

You're using "Destined to look stupid" in the future tense, as if it hasn't happened yet.

Check you're clock, I think it's slipped into Humbertime!!!!

 

[humber]

I hope Ross doesn't mind, but I'll reply to both posts...

But you will do so anyway.

Pathetic. Disguised scatalogical references to you too. Never mind that you're a walking repository of the stuff. Repository? Is that the right prefix? Suppose so.

There's nothing like a 'me too' after a few hours to think it up. Artificial and out of context.

I think what you're refering to is called the music of the spheres.

No, not the music. Try again. Another belated 'me too' that lost its sting in the rush to delay.

Those who haven't got the humility or patience to learn anything at all are destined to look very stupid.

Then it must be another very powerful reason in your case, John.

 

[John Freestone]

OK, still not right. Please show him the treadmill video, perhaps #7
If the cart can travel back from the belt to stationary, that is another matter. I expect that he thinks that is the case. As I have said, belts are not roads.

However, if the vehicle has its own power source and actually moves relative to the belt, it will move relative to the ground at the same time, at least on this planet. That is different from the treadmill. These distinctions are not made, because none you seem to appreciate their significance.

Explain that the cart is placed by hand. Ask about the belt boundary layer and its direction. Then ask him if this is the equivalent of a cart at windspeed and evidence that it will get there.
I know at least one engineer who believes in over-energy, so I am not sure what the point is,
but then again, H'ethetheth, I don't offer third-hand evidence.

Then ask him if he knows he can't win.
Then ask him if he knows what over-energy is.
Then ask him if he knows that the main difference between a parked car and a moving one is the acceleration. (Funny, I could swear my speedometer was marked in miles per hour. Must be short for miles per hour per hour or something.)

 

[RossFW]

Quote:
My reference is the ground, and I have repeatedly made the clear.

You are quite entitled to call the ground A reference. You cannot (Though you have repeatedly done so) say because something has zero KE WRT ONE reference, it has zero KE to ALL references. (That's what saying it has Zero KE in all frames means, in case you didn't understand your own statement).

You seem to be avoiding this one Humber.

 

[humber]

John,

You're using "Destined to look stupid" in the future tense, as if it hasn't happened yet.

Check you're clock, I think it's slipped into Humbertime!!!!

Not answering questions that you deem simple, is destined to make you look simple.

 

[Michael C]

Yes, I am capable of concluding that. I mentioned that I would defend my position regardless of reward. The inference was yours.
Of course, you overlooked the other reasons in the process, Michael_C.

If you're ready to defend your position regardless of reward, why don't you agree to RossFW proposal? The inference for me is clear: you're afraid of losing.

 

[John Freestone]

John,

You're using "Destined to look stupid" in the future tense, as if it hasn't happened yet.

Check you're clock, I think it's slipped into Humbertime!!!!

Thanks, Ross. I accidentally froze my clock's hands for a bit and they stopped accelerating. I'm back now.

 

[humber]

You seem to be avoiding this one Humber.

No RossFW. That is not correct. Because there is no absolute reference, I may choose one. From that point, I can make a datum, allowing rejection of common mode effects. This allows me to make direct comparisons.
There is nothing that you can say to deny me my position, because they are all equivalent. All objects look the same from all views.
There is a mistake in your interpretation. All KE's appear to all views, except one. Yes, the view from that object itself. Useless, but if you like, true.
In order to make your version stick, the only other objects from which zero KE exists, are other objects in the same "frame". These you must artificially create, so that they become indistinguishable from the other object of that comparison. A totally redundant idea, I'm afraid.
So, to make a lasting impression, do that for an object on the belt.

 

[spork]

Sorry guys, I honestly can't believe that humber can be so completely consistently wrong. At least a part of this is clearly a game to him. Do I think he's an evil genius? NO. He definitely doesn't have a clue about physics. But this has clearly become a game for him.

The only thing more hopeless than trying to nail him down to any actual statement, would be trying to get him to come up with $1000 or agree to giving it up. Do you really think Drela is dumb enough to get dragged into a life long battle about whether his words meant humber was right or wrong?

 

[humber]

If you're ready to defend your position regardless of reward, why don't you agree to RossFW proposal? The inference for me is clear: you're afraid of losing.

No, logic is not your strong suite, Micheal_C.
Also, perhaps I would have an even greater expert than Dr Drelsl in mind, but the the other reasons I gave, surmount that one.

 

[humber]

Sorry guys....

persona non grata.

 

[humber]

Thanks, Ross. I accidentally froze my clock's hands for a bit and they stopped accelerating. I'm back now.

Time well spent for you.

 

[John Freestone]

But you will do so anyway.

Indeed. He is welcome to answer your reply to me, or mark my work out of 100.

There's nothing like a 'me too' after a few hours to think it up. Artificial and out of context.

I just noted that your scatalogical insult was pathetic. It wasn't hours, but no matter. Actually I was out pushing the Earth around with my feet to give it some exercise.

No, not the music. Try again. Another belated 'me too' that lost its sting in the rush to delay.

Well I googled, but don't see anything remotely relevant, except of course that there are many many mechanical problems on the net involving spheres, so 'energy of the spheres' does tend to come up. Please do enlighten me to what that pre-scientific idea is that I exhumed.

Then it must be another very powerful reason in your case, John.

No. As you can see from the above, I'm asking questions so that I learn. If there is such a pre-scientific idea as the energy of the spheres, I'm happy for you or anyone else to tell me about it.

 

[Michael C]

No, logic is not your strong suite, Micheal_C.

When all else fails you fall back on insults. That makes it even more clear: you're avoiding the idea of bringing in an expert because you're afraid of the outcome.

In fact there are experts enough posting on this discussion, but you're incapable of accepting that.

 

[John Freestone]

P.S. I even wikki-ed, but wikipedia haven't got a page on the energy of the spheres yet. You should write one.

 

[humber]

Indeed. He is welcome to answer your reply to me, or mark my work out of 100.

No need to consider 100.

I just noted that your scatalogical insult was pathetic

Prudish.

It wasn't hours, but no matter. Actually I was out pushing the Earth around with my feet to give it some exercise.

Must be the frozen hands of your clock

Well I googled, but don't see anything remotely relevant, except of course that there are many many mechanical problems on the net involving spheres, so 'energy of the spheres' does tend to come up. Please do enlighten me to what that pre-scientific idea is that I exhumed.
As you can see from the above, I'm asking questions so that I learn. If there is such a pre-scientific idea as the energy of the spheres, I'm happy for you or anyone else to tell me about it.

Unwise. Knowledge is dangerous in your hands.

 

[humber]

When all else fails you fall back on insults. That makes it even more clear: you're avoiding the idea of bringing in an expert because you're afraid of the outcome.

In fact there are experts enough posting on this discussion, but you're incapable of accepting that.

What does a simple 'no' mean to you, Micheal_C? If you press your point because you insist I fall in line with your ideas, then you can expect an appropriate insult. OK?
ETA:
I said I would do so in front of Dr Drela. You want that, you get him at your expense.

 

[John Freestone]

Sorry guys, I honestly can't believe that humber can be so completely consistently wrong. At least a part of this is clearly a game to him. Do I think he's an evil genius? NO. He definitely doesn't have a clue about physics. But this has clearly become a game for him.

The only thing more hopeless than trying to nail him down to any actual statement, would be trying to get him to come up with $1000 or agree to giving it up. Do you really think Drela is dumb enough to get dragged into a life long battle about whether his words meant humber was right or wrong?

I agree. Even trying to hammer out a test to perform on your treamill was the same. He has to add clauses or object to clauses, to see how far he can get away from his original proposition. The same happened with asking Drela for his opinion before. It doesn't matter whether they're a living legend or a dead one, they can't win. Humber wins. That is the game.