|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#891
|
|||
|
|||
What is wrong with the 'Mainstream Scientific Establishment'?
On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 20:33:01 -0000, "Androcles"
wrote: "Henry Wilson DSc." ..@.. wrote in message .. . | On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 05:31:03 -0000, "Androcles" | wrote: | | I have not used L = R because that is impossible. | | | | I have used L = 1.01 R and L = 1.003 R which is close enough to 1. | | | What you should have is this: | http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...pistonY&dY.JPG | Microsoft Excel can draw the impossible, stupid Wilson can't follow a | simple instruction. **** off, you are a moron. | | I have produced your blue curve for different values of L/R as the ratio | approaches 1. Mine just happens to be upside down, as is normal on | computers. | | Gawd knows what your pink curve is. | | Don't worry about it, a ****ing moron that can't do as asked can never understand what it is. I have used L = R because the ****ing idiot Wilson says it is impossible. It is a mechanical impossibility, not a mathematical one. |
#892
|
|||
|
|||
What is wrong with the 'Mainstream Scientific Establishment'?
"Henry Wilson DSc." ..@.. wrote in message ... | On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 20:33:01 -0000, "Androcles" | wrote: | | | "Henry Wilson DSc." ..@.. wrote in message | .. . | | On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 05:31:03 -0000, "Androcles" | | wrote: | | | | I have not used L = R because that is impossible. | | | | | | I have used L = 1.01 R and L = 1.003 R which is close enough to 1. | | | | | What you should have is this: | | http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...pistonY&dY.JPG | | Microsoft Excel can draw the impossible, stupid Wilson can't follow a | | simple instruction. **** off, you are a moron. | | | | I have produced your blue curve for different values of L/R as the ratio | | approaches 1. Mine just happens to be upside down, as is normal on | | computers. | | | | Gawd knows what your pink curve is. | | | | | Don't worry about it, a ****ing moron that can't do as asked can never | understand what it is. I have used L = R because the ****ing idiot Wilson | says it is impossible. | | It is a mechanical impossibility, not a mathematical one. You are groping at straws trying to cover your arse because you ****ed up. The pink curve is dy[t] = scale * (y[t]-y[t-1])+k, but you don't need arrays. You can't ****ing read because you know it all. Nobody can teach you anything because you refuse to learn. |
#893
|
|||
|
|||
What is wrong with the 'Mainstream Scientific Establishment'?
On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 22:57:37 -0000, "Androcles"
wrote: "Henry Wilson DSc." ..@.. wrote in message .. . | On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 20:33:01 -0000, "Androcles" | wrote: | | | "Henry Wilson DSc." ..@.. wrote in message | .. . | | On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 05:31:03 -0000, "Androcles" | | wrote: | | | | I have not used L = R because that is impossible. | | | | | | I have used L = 1.01 R and L = 1.003 R which is close enough to 1. | | | | | What you should have is this: | | http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...pistonY&dY.JPG | | Microsoft Excel can draw the impossible, stupid Wilson can't follow a | | simple instruction. **** off, you are a moron. | | | | I have produced your blue curve for different values of L/R as the ratio | | approaches 1. Mine just happens to be upside down, as is normal on | | computers. | | | | Gawd knows what your pink curve is. | | | | | Don't worry about it, a ****ing moron that can't do as asked can never | understand what it is. I have used L = R because the ****ing idiot Wilson | says it is impossible. | | It is a mechanical impossibility, not a mathematical one. You are groping at straws trying to cover your arse because you ****ed up. The pink curve is dy[t] = scale * (y[t]-y[t-1])+k, but you don't need arrays. You can't ****ing read because you know it all. Nobody can teach you anything because you refuse to learn. Your equation is wrong for the general case. ....and t-1 is a phase shift. What are you really looking for? |
#894
|
|||
|
|||
What is wrong with the 'Mainstream Scientific Establishment'?
"Henry Wilson DSc." ..@.. wrote in message ... | On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 22:57:37 -0000, "Androcles" | wrote: | | | "Henry Wilson DSc." ..@.. wrote in message | .. . | | On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 20:33:01 -0000, "Androcles" | | wrote: | | | | | | "Henry Wilson DSc." ..@.. wrote in message | | .. . | | | On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 05:31:03 -0000, "Androcles" | | | wrote: | | | | | | I have not used L = R because that is impossible. | | | | | | | | I have used L = 1.01 R and L = 1.003 R which is close enough to 1. | | | | | | | What you should have is this: | | | http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...pistonY&dY.JPG | | | Microsoft Excel can draw the impossible, stupid Wilson can't follow a | | | simple instruction. **** off, you are a moron. | | | | | | I have produced your blue curve for different values of L/R as the | ratio | | | approaches 1. Mine just happens to be upside down, as is normal on | | | computers. | | | | | | Gawd knows what your pink curve is. | | | | | | | | Don't worry about it, a ****ing moron that can't do as asked can never | | understand what it is. I have used L = R because the ****ing idiot | Wilson | | says it is impossible. | | | | It is a mechanical impossibility, not a mathematical one. | | You are groping at straws trying to cover your arse because you ****ed | up. The pink curve is dy[t] = scale * (y[t]-y[t-1])+k, but you don't need | arrays. You can't ****ing read because you know it all. Nobody can | teach you anything because you refuse to learn. | | Your equation is wrong for the general case. | You are an ignoramus. | ...and t-1 is a phase shift. | I did forget to wrap back to the beginning. http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...pistonY&dY.JPG You've never heard of dy/h = [f(x)-f(x-h)]/h where h = dx. | What are you really looking for? You'll never know because the ****ing idiot Wilson claims his e = 0.84 ellipse is an e = 0.85 ellipse and L=R is impossible. Cherry-pick impossibilities to fit your theory, Wilson, that's the mark of a true Einstein dingleberry. They are all ****heads certain they are right and know ****-all mathematics, just like you, Inertial Humpty Tusseladd Diaper Wilson. |
#895
|
|||
|
|||
What is wrong with the 'Mainstream Scientific Establishment'?
On Tue, 29 Nov 2011 04:45:11 -0000, "Androcles"
wrote: "Henry Wilson DSc." ..@.. wrote in message .. . | On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 22:57:37 -0000, "Androcles" | wrote: | | It is a mechanical impossibility, not a mathematical one. | | You are groping at straws trying to cover your arse because you ****ed | up. The pink curve is dy[t] = scale * (y[t]-y[t-1])+k, but you don't need | arrays. You can't ****ing read because you know it all. Nobody can | teach you anything because you refuse to learn. | | Your equation is wrong for the general case. | You are an ignoramus. From YOU that's a compliment. | ...and t-1 is a phase shift. | I did forget to wrap back to the beginning. http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...pistonY&dY.JPG Your blue curve is the same as mine...... christ knows what the pink one is. One thing is certain, if a piston moves like that...with infinite acceleration....it will break. You've never heard of dy/h = [f(x)-f(x-h)]/h where h = dx. | What are you really looking for? You'll never know because the ****ing idiot Wilson claims his e = 0.84 ellipse is an e = 0.85 ellipse and L=R is impossible. Cherry-pick impossibilities to fit your theory, Wilson, that's the mark of a true Einstein dingleberry. They are all ****heads certain they are right and know ****-all mathematics, just like you, Inertial Humpty Tusseladd Diaper Wilson. |
#896
|
|||
|
|||
What is wrong with the 'Mainstream Scientific Establishment'?
"Henry Wilson DSc." ..@.. wrote in message ... | On Tue, 29 Nov 2011 04:45:11 -0000, "Androcles" | wrote: | | | "Henry Wilson DSc." ..@.. wrote in message | .. . | | On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 22:57:37 -0000, "Androcles" | | wrote: | | | | It is a mechanical impossibility, not a mathematical one. | | | | You are groping at straws trying to cover your arse because you ****ed | | up. The pink curve is dy[t] = scale * (y[t]-y[t-1])+k, but you don't | need | | arrays. You can't ****ing read because you know it all. Nobody can | | teach you anything because you refuse to learn. | | | | Your equation is wrong for the general case. | | | You are an ignoramus. | | From YOU that's a compliment. | | | ...and t-1 is a phase shift. | | | I did forget to wrap back to the beginning. | http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...pistonY&dY.JPG | | Your blue curve is the same as mine...... christ knows what the pink one is. | One thing is certain, if a piston moves like that...with infinite | acceleration....it will break. Rubbish, golf clubs don't break, you ignoramus. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkB81u5IM3I Go on, tell me you can snap golf clubs with infinite acceleration. You'll say anything to argue, you are worse than Tom&Jeery. | | You've never heard of dy/h = [f(x)-f(x-h)]/h where h = dx. | | | What are you really looking for? | | You'll never know because the ****ing idiot Wilson claims his | e = 0.84 ellipse is an e = 0.85 ellipse and L=R is impossible. | Cherry-pick impossibilities to fit your theory, Wilson, that's the | mark of a true Einstein dingleberry. They are all ****heads certain | they are right and know ****-all mathematics, just like you, Inertial | Humpty Tusseladd Diaper Wilson. | | | | |
#897
|
|||
|
|||
What is wrong with the 'Mainstream Scientific Establishment'?
On 28.11.2011 21:24, Henry Wilson DSc. wrote:
On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 11:16:55 -0800 (PST), Jerry wrote: On Nov 25, 5:16 pm, ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) wrote: On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 22:49:47 +0100, "Paul B. Andersen" The peculiarity is that if r is the distance from the hub to the ground, the wheel will advance more than 2 pi r per revolution. How is that possible? The sides of the tire are flexing. Oh dear! I feel embarrassed reading this. If you didn't understand it, you should indeed be embarrassed. Whenever you are told the simplest fact, you refuse to believe it. Why is that? You did not make clear whether you took into account the flattening of the tyre when spcified the radius. Any normal reader would take it to mean the uncompressed radius of the tyre. Try reading the original problem statement again: Inserting context: The odometer/speedometer readings are much less dependent on the tire pressure than one would be inclined to think. That's because modern tires usually are steel-belted radial tires, where the circumference of the tire is very stable and little dependent on the pressure. So when the wheel has made one revolution, it will have advanced one circumference. "The peculiarity is that if r is the distance from the hub to the ground, the wheel will advance more than 2 pi r per revolution. How is that possible? The sides of the tire are flexing." Ralph's response: "Oh dear! I feel embarrassed reading this. No wonder you are silly enough to believe everything Einstein said." Lethal argument defending his response follows. Taa-daa: There is no mention of a car....just a wheel. You are of course right, Ralph. Nobody has ever mentioned a car. When you started the discussion about to what degree the tire pressure affects the odometer readings by stating: "I assumed the odometer reading is also 2% high...but I could be wrong. It also depends on the tyre pressure." ... you were obviously thinking of just a wheel with an odometer. And we all know that for just a wheel with an odometer, the odometer readings depend on the tire pressure. So you were right: The odometer reading depend on the tire pressure! Right? -- Paul, having fun http://www.gethome.no/paulba/ |
#898
|
|||
|
|||
What is wrong with the 'Mainstream Scientific Establishment'?
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 11:31:33 +0100, "Paul B. Andersen"
wrote: On 28.11.2011 21:24, Henry Wilson DSc. wrote: On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 11:16:55 -0800 (PST), Jerry wrote: Inserting context: The odometer/speedometer readings are much less dependent on the tire pressure than one would be inclined to think. That's because modern tires usually are steel-belted radial tires, where the circumference of the tire is very stable and little dependent on the pressure. So when the wheel has made one revolution, it will have advanced one circumference. "The peculiarity is that if r is the distance from the hub to the ground, the wheel will advance more than 2 pi r per revolution. How is that possible? The sides of the tire are flexing." Ralph's response: "Oh dear! I feel embarrassed reading this. No wonder you are silly enough to believe everything Einstein said." Lethal argument defending his response follows. Taa-daa: There is no mention of a car....just a wheel. You are of course right, Ralph. Nobody has ever mentioned a car. When you started the discussion about to what degree the tire pressure affects the odometer readings by stating: "I assumed the odometer reading is also 2% high...but I could be wrong. It also depends on the tyre pressure." .. you were obviously thinking of just a wheel with an odometer. And we all know that for just a wheel with an odometer, the odometer readings depend on the tire pressure. So you were right: The odometer reading depend on the tire pressure! Right? Well, after all, a barometer depends on the air pressure. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What the Scientific Establishment DOESN'T want you to knowof theSCIENTIFIC ESTABLISHMENT | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | September 2nd 08 01:54 PM |
Vested-Interest Secrets of the SCIENTIFIC ESTABLISHMENT (The Truth ItDoesn't Want You to Know) | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | September 2nd 08 01:47 PM |
Corrupt Scientific Establishment Still Blackballing Ed Conrad's Incredible Discoveries -- Evolution vs. Intelligent Design | Ed Conrad | Astronomy Misc | 0 | July 21st 06 11:42 AM |
ED CONRAD the PO8 -- Ode to the Scientific Establishment - | John Zinni | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | April 27th 06 08:41 PM |
ED CONRAD the PO8 -- Ode to the Scientific Establishment.. | Ed Conrad | Astronomy Misc | 1 | March 30th 06 06:31 AM |