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

[humb]

Actually, not a secret forum, but a forum controlled by someone with a direct interest in DDWFTTW.

Ah yes, a place where you can hide from people with actual knowledge of things, and you can ruminate in your own stew. Don't let in those who know better, they might spoil the fantasy party.

In the strange "frames universe", where KE comes and goes at will, can you step off a falling escalator at the last minute and land unharmed like a daisy? KE = 0 for the escalator in your "frame", right? Or maybe a falling treadmill. Does it matter how fast the treadmill is turning when you hit the ground? Perhaps if you move it fast enough, you will have KE = 0. Or defuse the dynamite. Don't tell that to the ground, which knows better and will smash you like a trout.

Do you know what I give you "frame boys"? Razzberries!

 

[humb]

The answer to all of this is from Einstein. Yes, everything is relative, but also Generally so. The earth with its large mass dominates, and all other "frames" must conform. It is called "frame dragging". Wiki that and see where it leaves your treadmill. In the cosmic dust, no doubt! Or do you deny the validity of Einstein? Even Galileo knew that. You say that the treadmill and the cart and the bullet has KE = 0. "E pur si muove."

 

[humb]

Just imagine two of your cotton reels. One is empty and the other has 1000 meters of filament. The prop-shaft has the full spool, and the axle has the empty one. As the axle turns it pulls the filament onto its spool. This can give you a nearly 100% efficient transmission - even with the 90 degree turn that's required. But it has an obvious range limitation, and the possibility of spewing filament everywhere if not designed well.

Yes, and yet another illusion. In addition to the flywheel you will store energy in the elastic string and oscillate around a fictitional speed that will never exceed the negative headwind. Also with the 90 degrees of twist, you will gain by precession from the propeller to the wheels and back? Right hand rule! Only if the cart will run in circles, but perhaps that is why you are counting on the equally fictitional turntable to deploy your aims. But if it travels in a circle, then the average velocity is zero and KE = 0 still, as seen from the ground or ang so-called "frame". Reducto Allah Bsurdum!

 

[spacediver]

If I try and construct your world, I need fantastic levels of precision to avoid fatal errors. How do you do that? How do you know the precise level of force and acceleration before the event?
Perhaps you can answer some of the questions that Christian won't.

Utter nonsense. In the construction of the quasi-relative but in reality absolute KE world, precision is also relative. The level of accelerative force does not exist before or after the event, but rather during.

 

[Clive]

Humb or Humber, that is the question...

The answer to all of this is from Einstein. Yes, everything is relative, but also Generally so. The earth with its large mass dominates, and all other "frames" must conform. It is called "frame dragging".

Humb, I'd like to hear your response to my post #2744 (on page 69). Humber seems to be having a lot of trouble with it for some reason. I'm not sure why though - it doesn't involve any significant mathematics. Perhaps you can help him out?

In case you haven't read #2744 previously, it involves a thought experiment where we use half the earth as a kind of treadmill. Feel free to add in the appropriate frame dragging calculations if you think they are at all relevant.

 

[humber]

Utter nonsense. In the construction of the quasi-relative but in reality absolute KE world, precision is also relative. The level of accelerative force does not exist before or after the event, but rather during.

I am afraid not. Einstein's world is about information. Also, your view raises questions of what is computable, and how you manage get the data ahead of time.
Really, I have some magic beans to sell you. Notice though, that when in my palm, they all have a relative KE of zero. All the objects that have the same "velocity" and so the same "frame" no matter where they are, are joined as it were, by an invisible plane.

 

[humber]

Humb or Humber, that is the question...


Humb, I'd like to hear your response to my post #2744 (on page 69). Humber seems to be having a lot of trouble with it for some reason. I'm not sure why though - it doesn't involve any significant mathematics. Perhaps you can help him out?

In case you haven't read #2744 previously, it involves a thought experiment where we use half the earth as a kind of treadmill. Feel free to add in the appropriate frame dragging calculations if you think they are at all relevant.

Again, sorry. I am working on it!

 

[spacediver]

I am afraid not. Einstein's world is about information. Also, your view raises questions of what is computable, and how you manage get the data ahead of time.

Yes, information is key. But computability is irrelevant to the temporal frame of reference.

Really, I have some magic beans to sell you. Notice though, that when in my palm, they all have a relative KE of zero. All the objects that have the same "velocity" and so the same "frame" no matter where they are, are joined as it were, by an invisible plane.

But if the beans are poisonous, you'll be fataled before you have a chance to compute the relative KE. So your position is completely flawed.

 

[humber]

Yes, information is key. But computability is irrelevant to the temporal frame of reference.

Not at all. The computation must be done in situ. You still need to calculate it beforehand, or have some means of doing so in real time. Big problems there.

But if the beans are poisonous, you'll be fataled before you have a chance to compute the relative KE. So your position is completely flawed.

They are not poisonous. Still zero KE, eh? That's all you need to make a new palm frame. I can pass them to you from a treadmill if you like.

 

[John Freestone]

Make is a barrel of oil moving at 100m/s. How much error is your velocity will kill you?

There's no need to post drunken non-sequiturs: you're already busted. It's like you asked me "John, if you had my car keys instead of yours, will you be able to get into your car?", and, with a week to think about it, I finally answered "Bananas ripe better is you leave them on the parcel shelf." Are you stoned when you do this?

All that to tell me you took the meaning, but not that you wrongly attributed the claim of Chief Scientist to me?

I said, "Ok.", as in, Ok, I wrongly attributed the claim of Chief Scientist to you. Then I said "It's ROFL" so that you might get it right next time, and "BTW, AFAIK" for a bit of light-hearted banter, y'know?

 

[spacediver]

They are not poisonous. Still zero KE, eh? That's all you need to make a new palm frame. I can pass them to you from a treadmill if you like.

The beans' KE is theoretically infinite, but these are just mathematical symbols. Worship of these symbols leads to a profound ignorance of actual reality. I worked at a bean farm, and I've observed how fatal they are. There is no way someone handling beans would be able to perform the mathematical calculation necessary to ascertain the KE for the beans in the appropriate frame of equivalence.

 

[Reality Check]

The answer to all of this is from Einstein. Yes, everything is relative, but also Generally so. The earth with its large mass dominates, and all other "frames" must conform. It is called "frame dragging". Wiki that and see where it leaves your treadmill. In the cosmic dust, no doubt! Or do you deny the validity of Einstein? Even Galileo knew that. You say that the treadmill and the cart and the bullet has KE = 0. "E pur si muove."

You should read the Wikipedia article yourself: Frame-dragging

Albert Einstein's theory of general relativity predicts that rotating bodies drag spacetime around themselves in a phenomenon referred to as frame-dragging. The rotational frame-dragging effect was first derived from the theory of general relativity in 1918 by the Austrian physicists Josef Lense and Hans Thirring, and is also known as the Lense-Thirring effect.[1][2][3] Lense and Thirring predicted that the rotation of an object would alter space and time, dragging a nearby object out of position compared to the predictions of Newtonian physics. The predicted effect is incredibly small — about one part in a few trillion. In order to detect it, it is necessary to look at a very massive object, or build an instrument that is incredibly sensitive. More generally, the subject of field effects caused by moving matter is known as gravitomagnetism.

We happen not live on a massive rotating black hole and so there is no detectable frame-dragging on Earth.

You may also want to refresh your knowledge of what a frame of reference is: Frame of reference.

 

[Modified]

You should read the Wikipedia article yourself: Frame-dragging

Dude...

 

[humber]

The beans' KE is theoretically infinite, but these are just mathematical symbols. Worship of these symbols leads to a profound ignorance of actual reality. I worked at a bean farm, and I've observed how fatal they are. There is no way someone handling beans would be able to perform the mathematical calculation necessary to ascertain the KE for the beans in the appropriate frame of equivalence.

Then you don't know beans. As you say, worship of symbols leads you to believe that a world where al objects where "KE =0 " can ever be useful.

 

[humber]

You should read the Wikipedia article yourself: Frame-dragging

We happen not live on a massive rotating black hole and so there is no detectable frame-dragging on Earth.

You may also want to refresh your knowledge of what a frame of reference is: Frame of reference.

That would all be useful to know when it can be shown that the treadmill is subject to any of the above effects.

 

[humber]

There's no need to post drunken non-sequiturs: you're already busted. It's like you asked me "John, if you had my car keys instead of yours, will you be able to get into your car?", and, with a week to think about it, I finally answered "Bananas ripe better is you leave them on the parcel shelf." Are you stoned when you do this?

Flat out. Me, my posse, crack whores, AA dropouts and the guys from Cell Block G (a group of logical positivists).

I said, "Ok.", as in, Ok, I wrongly attributed the claim of Chief Scientist to you. Then I said "It's ROFL" so that you might get it right next time, and "BTW, AFAIK" for a bit of light-hearted banter, y'know?

[/QUOTE]
It was the lack of " light-hearted banter" that fooled me.

 

[sol invictus]

Flat out. Me, my posse, crack whores, AA dropouts and the guys from Cell Block G (a group of logical positivists).

Hey humber - how do you like posting in a special thread created just for you and your trolling, entitled "The validity of classical physics"?

Of course you can't post in the other, since anything you said would be off-topic and a violation of the forum rules. It's a bit like being in prison...

 

[humber]

Hell CORed,

yes, indeed it would in the humberverse. But then, we couldn't have any cars or anything else, since we would have been smashed by the KE of the earth and all objects on it by now. I'm wondering "where did all the KE go" that the my house has, while sitting in it. In the humberverse, it should have smashed me as soon as i put a foot in it.

A strange place that humberverse is, indeed...

Greetings,

Chris

How does a car or house stationary wrt the ground move without accellerating, and so increasing its KE?

 

[Michael C]

Do items flowing in a river reach riverspeed?

yes

Why not? If you have a power boat, don't you need constant force and energy to maintain riverspeed?

no

 

[humber]

yes
No, they do not. Next time, observe that different items move at different speeds. Just like in the wind.

no

Boats must overcome the drag upon the hull, just as a windblown object must overcome the aerodynamic drag.
The fastest river water is somewhat below the surface. In a canoe you cannot travel as fast as even the surface water without paddling.