A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

What is wrong with the 'Mainstream Scientific Establishment'?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #891  
Old November 28th 11, 10:04 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
Henry Wilson DSc.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 451
Default 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  
Old November 28th 11, 11:57 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
Androcles[_66_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 94
Default 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  
Old November 29th 11, 04:19 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
Henry Wilson DSc.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 451
Default 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  
Old November 29th 11, 05:45 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
Androcles[_66_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 94
Default 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  
Old November 29th 11, 11:54 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
Henry Wilson DSc.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 451
Default 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  
Old November 29th 11, 12:44 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
Androcles[_66_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 94
Default 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  
Old November 30th 11, 11:31 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
Paul B. Andersen[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 30
Default 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  
Old December 1st 11, 03:50 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
Henry Wilson DSc.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 451
Default 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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.