Continuation Part 5: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

[Kaosium]

I don't think this is a serious discussion. That guy drtesla is either really ignorant or triying to wind us up. I mean, he appears to lack an understanding of very basic physics (thinks gravity acceleration is proportional to the mass, seems to ignore newton's laws of motion as well), yet he pretends he's a mechanical engineer. Other than that, you're right, it's just an innane discussion, there's nothing special about a rock going through a glass window.

Yes, that rock through the window wouldn't be much of a difficulty for a delinquent twelve year-old. This, and the discussion of whether a burglar can get through a window without being spiderman reminds me of something a math instructor told me once. How some mathy thing was invented by solving this problem:

If you're moving in a straight line no matter how fast you go you will always reach half the distance to your goal. Each time you do you will have half that distance left, and you can only ever get halfway to your goal then, and future times you will always have something left that is half that, going down to micrometers and stuff there's always some half left. Therefore you can never reach your goal.

Then I forget what he said!

Anyway, I've a friend who was a math major, his father was a math professor (I have a lot of friends like that--professors not math though) he throws words like I've seen in this discussion around all the time, gives me a headache. He's an interesting guy to talk to but he's a grade-A kook sometimes. Recently he regaled me on his theory that gas prices go up automatically because 'they' decide there's too many cars on the road, thus gas prices must go up. He deduced this from a study he saw where when gas prices go up, generally people drive less.

I've concluded too much math rots the brain.

 

[DrTesla]

No it would not, all objects fall at exactly the same rate (subject to air resistance which would not overly effect a rock.) Galileo proved this by dropping two lead balls of weights of differing weight off the leaning Tower of Pisa and showing that they hit the ground at the same time. It was further proven using a feather and a hammer in the vacuum of the moon during the Apollo 15 mission. It is also shown on a regular basis using two tubes which have a vacuum in them along with a feather in one and a ball of lead in the other which are used to demonstrate the principle in the Natural Museum of History in Washington D.C. and likely other places about the world.



No one throws any object in a perfectly straight line. As soon as the object leaves the person's hand it goes into a ballistic orbit, though one that tends to intersect with the ground. To get an object to hit a target at the same level as you are several metres away, you have to place a vertical component to the force vector meaning that you lob the object, just like you have to do with a basketball.



You didn't answer this last time I pointed out your error on this one. Newton's First Law of Motion declares that an object in motion remains in that motion unless a force is enacted on it. What horizontal force is being applied to the rock to slow its horizontal velocity down once it has left the thrower's hand?



Hmm, so you mean he was good at lobbing objects and hitting small targets with them, especially ones above his head height?

ok but it still seems like a 10 lb rock thrown horizontally is going to start dropping sooner than a lighter one even if they both hit the ground at the same time. the trajectory is different, not the time spent in the air. this is what I loved about mechanical engineering I didn't have to understand the science just plug and chug the equations. the free fallilng thing drop example you talk about is the one scenario where they would hit the ground at the same time and have the exact same trajectory it would seem but again my mind is clearly distracted b/c I keep thinking about a 3 way with Knox and her sister Deanna while next to the body of some babe we just butchered cuz we were bored and needed some excitement.

I already talked about the lobbing action that would be required, as never thought direct line was possible which I thought I made clear, and how this this would make it more difficult to hit the window on the first trial b/c you got to get the trajectory right so that it will hit the window on the way down which at least talking about it seems harder to do than a more direct line throw like a pitcher to the mound. so there is going to be some trial and error on part of the theoretical intruder unless he practices throwing rocks at windows of some distance away.

all of this was for the idea that he was on the parking lot which as I understood it was fairly level with the window. I thought some people in here were pushing the parking lot as his throwing location vs the yard below.

enough about the physics of throwing this rock , I want to get back into my comfort zone of talking about Knox GETTING IT ON and butchering her roommate.

what's funny though is there no evidence this African boy ever went in through that window and still seems real illogical for him to go through that window and expose himself sound and sight to witnesses and just add a lot of time and hassle for him to get in there. if he's got a boner for this babe you think he would want to get in there and be tapping that so he is just going to hit the lower window off the balcony around back.

 

[MDDVS]

Yes, that rock through the window wouldn't be much of a difficulty for a delinquent twelve year-old. This, and the discussion of whether a burglar can get through a window reminds me of something a math instructor told me once. How some mathy thing was invented by solving this problem:

If you're moving in a straight line no matter how fast you go you will always reach half the distance to your goal. Each time you do you will have half that distance left, and you can only ever get halfway to your goal then, and future times you will always have something left that is half that, going down to micrometers and stuff there's always some half left. Therefore you can never reach your goal.

Then I forget what he said!

Anyway, I've a friend who was a math major, his father was a math professor (I have a lot of friends like that) he throws words like I've seen in this discussion around all the time, gives me a headache. He's an interesting guy to talk to but he's a grade-A kook sometimes. Recently he regaled me on his theory that gas prices go up automatically because 'they' decide there's too many cars on the road, thus gas prices must go up. He deduced this from a study he saw where when gas prices go up, generally people drive less.

I've concluded too much math rots the brain.

The thing with the distances you mention is one of Zeno's paradoxes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno's_paradoxes). The thing with that is that it is actually possible to sum an infinite numer of terms in such way that you get the corrrect distance in the end.

 

[MDDVS]

ok but it still seems like a 10 lb rock thrown horizontally is going to start dropping sooner than a lighter one even if they both hit the ground at the same time. the trajectory is different, not the time spent in the air. this is what I loved about mechanical engineering I didn't have to understand the science just plug and chug the equations. the free fallilng thing drop example you talk about is the one scenario where they would hit the ground at the same time and have the exact same trajectory it would seem but again my mind is clearly distracted b/c I keep thinking about a 3 way with Knox and her sister Deanna while next to the body of some babe we just butchered cuz we were bored and needed some excitement.

I already talked about the lobbing action that would be required, as never thought direct line was possible which I thought I made clear, and how this this would make it more difficult to hit the window on the first trial b/c you got to get the trajectory right so that it will hit the window on the way down which at least talking about it seems harder to do than a more direct line throw like a pitcher to the mound. so there is going to be some trial and error on part of the theoretical intruder unless he practices throwing rocks at windows of some distance away.

all of this was for the idea that he was on the parking lot which as I understood it was fairly level with the window. I thought some people in here were pushing the parking lot as his throwing location vs the yard below.

enough about the physics of throwing this rock , I want to get back into my comfort zone of talking about Knox GETTING IT ON and butchering her roommate.

Nice post. I think you need to change your punch lines though. They're getting a bit old and quickly losing their comedical value. I didn't laugh too much time, but better luck next time.

 

[Briars]

Do you feel the things said about Amanda here recently (see for example Mary_H's compilation of a few of them; I seem to recall "sex addict" and misstating the name of Ms. Knox's book as well) are justified.

I see them as completely separate issues. Anyone with a shred of decency should recognize that they are in different class.You don't go after the victim's family because people say mean things about the accused period!!They are not defendants in this ongoing case. They have the right to the full court process, and have remained respectful in spite of it all. Any outlandish payback to them to support Amanda has the opposite effect.

 

[DrTesla]

Nice post. I think you need to change your punch lines though. They're getting a bit old and quickly losing their comedical value. I didn't laugh too much time, but better luck next time.

didn't you say velocity has nothing to do with momentum? p= mv

sure looks related to me, don't know how you split that bicycle, walk me through your logic.

 

[JREF2010]

It may lead to headaches but it is nevertheless necessary to have a go at understanding the sciency stuff to at least some basic level before forming an opinion based on it. .

I agree, and have been struggling through it.

But reading the C&V translations again yesterday, it is written clearly both sides were court ordered to participate in the Hellman court/ C&V DNA work. They were required to be there and both sides were there and not much was said about C&V doing anything wrong or any objections , except one note by Stefonani about not being under a fume hood, on one instance.

It was an intense part of the case, as I recall my own feelings, because no one knew the outcome.

But reading this report again yesterday, the knife wasn't cleaned at the crevice, etc..etc.. all party's were present during the testing, and the Stefonani data was at best "hurried" and storage of articles not handled well.

Some say Trace I might be the Supreme Court interest, and the C&V report mentions this "Trace I" in their report. But Im not 100% sure what its all about. It seems it was the same as another sample they took, matching trace-I and it was nothing.

Soon we'll know what the SC is wanting...

 

[yimyammer]

Me. Me. Me. I can.

There are two main reasons why we Brits have excessively restrictive and complicated defamation laws. Number 1, we don't have a constitution which enshrines a right of free speech. Number 2, we have allowed the laws to be made by judges. I could write a book on why this is not a good idea but, basically, if you want to turn an area of law into a total freaking mess then hand it to a bunch of English judges and leave them to get on with it for a couple of hundred years.

Italy, I wouldn't know.

LOL, thx bro (mam?)

sounds like I may not be crazy in thinking these laws may do more harm than good (At least as far as GB is concerned)

 

[anglolawyer]

Yes, that rock through the window wouldn't be much of a difficulty for a delinquent twelve year-old. This, and the discussion of whether a burglar can get through a window without being spiderman reminds me of something a math instructor told me once. How some mathy thing was invented by solving this problem:

If you're moving in a straight line no matter how fast you go you will always reach half the distance to your goal. Each time you do you will have half that distance left, and you can only ever get halfway to your goal then, and future times you will always have something left that is half that, going down to micrometers and stuff there's always some half left. Therefore you can never reach your goal. Then I forget what he said!

Anyway, I've a friend who was a math major, his father was a math professor (I have a lot of friends like that--professors not math though) he throws words like I've seen in this discussion around all the time, gives me a headache. He's an interesting guy to talk to but he's a grade-A kook sometimes. Recently he regaled me on his theory that gas prices go up automatically because 'they' decide there's too many cars on the road, thus gas prices must go up. He deduced this from a study he saw where when gas prices go up, generally people drive less.

I've concluded too much math rots the brain.

This is a famous old paradox. I think some Greek came up with it. The way I learned it, it was frog swimming across a pool. Well, I hope it's not too OT and I bet you know anyway but the 'solution' has something to do with the fact that two different types of infinity are being conflated. One as in numbers, which go on for ever and the other as in infinite divisibility of a finite thing, like a swimming pool. Something like that.

ETA sorry - just saw MDDVS's post.

 

[DrTesla]

well in a way a defamation suit is an expression of freedom of speech by the person who claims they were defamed and wants justice for it.

also, a defamation suit isn't preventing you from speaking it is only meant to punish you for content that is not true and meant to do the person you defamed harm in some way. You can defame all day but you will pay the price for it if a jury finds you to be a liar.

 

[anglolawyer]

LOL, thx bro (mam?)

sounds like I may not be crazy in thinking these laws may do more harm than good (At least as far as GB is concerned)

Er, (deep voice) it's 'bro' actually - and you're most welcome! Have a nice day Yeah, we are in a proper fix over here with our silly defamation laws.

 

[anglolawyer]

well in a way a defamation suit is an expression of freedom of speech by the person who claims they were defamed and wants justice for it.

also, a defamation suit isn't preventing you from speaking it is only meant to punish you for content that is not true and meant to do the person you defamed harm in some way. You can defame all day but you will pay the price for it if a jury finds you to be a liar.

I'd stick to mechanical engineering if I were you.

 

[DrTesla]

I'd stick to mechanical engineering if I were you.

Deleted.

 

[Grinder]

I just tested out one of the theories on rock throwing. I now need to have a window fixed. The slow moving ten pound rock broke it

 

[Chris_Halkides]

a silence that shouts

I see them as completely separate issues. Anyone with a shred of decency should recognize that they are in different class.You don't go after the victim's family because people say mean things about the accused period!!They are not defendants in this ongoing case. They have the right to the full court process, and have remained respectful in spite of it all. Any outlandish payback to them to support Amanda has the opposite effect.

This answers my question by failing to address it in a meaningful way. This inability suggests an inconsistency: one cannot say anything bad about the murder victim's family, but it is open season to hurl any sort of gratuitous insult on one of the defendants. Such a position ignores the obvious: the mudslinging against Ms. Knox started shortly after the murder, and only the willfully blind would argue it had no effect on the trials. This conversation has been...enlightening...but as far as I am concerned, it is over.

 

[anglolawyer]

I just tested out one of the theories on rock throwing. I now need to have a window fixed. The slow moving ten pound rock broke it

Did you check out whether it is posible to chuck a 10lb rock at a window and not break it?

 

[Sonia]

Both of them are exposed as being REAL dumb when you examine their testimonies and other statements. So dumb they are funny.

Oh, the irony.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

rock throwing video and news report

I just tested out one of the theories on rock throwing. I now need to have a window fixed. The slow moving ten pound rock broke it

Sgt. Pasquali beat you to the punch by at least four years.

 

[Bill Williams]

Do you feel the things said about Amanda here recently (see for example Mary_H's compilation of a few of them; I seem to recall "sex addict" and misstating the name of Ms. Knox's book as well) are justified.

I see them as completely separate issues. Anyone with a shred of decency should recognize that they are in different class.You don't go after the victim's family because people say mean things about the accused period!!They are not defendants in this ongoing case. They have the right to the full court process, and have remained respectful in spite of it all. Any outlandish payback to them to support Amanda has the opposite effect.

That, then (highlighted), is your problem.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

This answers my question by failing to address it in a meaningful way. This inability suggests an inconsistency: one cannot say anything bad about the murder victim's family, but it is open season to hurl any sort of gratuitous insult on one of the defendants. Such a position ignores the obvious: the mudslinging against Ms. Knox started shortly after the murder, and only the willfully blind would argue it had no effect on the trials. This conversation has been...enlightening...but as far as I am concerned, it is over.

I really don't see the need to degrade anyone, Amanda, Kerchers or anyone else in the case really, and the PIP's seem to do this a lot, Stef, Mignini, and on and on. If this were just about Amanda and the Kerchers, the Kerchers should be hands off by all means, it doesn't make you a bigger or better man to say derogatory about them, Amanda on the other hand has been found guilty of murder so some could understand perhaps name calling on that side.