Re: vortex recumbent

Gaby De Wilde wrote:

RC can just run away from the discussion.

His "crackpot" scientist subjects don't enjoy this privilege when
treated like this in the context of their lives work.

Specially the "crackpots" who have no success and are attempting that
what is assumed to be impossible.

Look if a guy wants to climb the Himalaya in his wheelchair then I
wish him all the best.

I guess I could climb ahead of him and piss in his face.

That would sure teach him!

Then I could point and laugh at his misfortune.

But the reality is that if I so much as say something to the guy I'm
already influencing his results. If I can make him give up by pissing
in his face then that will be the main reason he gave up.

"If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
- Sir Isaac Newton

When we innovate, we all stand on the shoulders of giants, among whom
we can count Sir Isaac. That is the only way by which we can make
progress. Every once in a long while, we may come across a freak like
Einstein who singlehandedly manages to revise problems in the rules
that have remained unsolved by all others. But even someone as
revolutionary as Einstein did not invalidate the principles that had
been identified and set forth by Newton hundreds of years before-- for
most people's purposes, Newton's laws still apply unerringly and
Einstein's will never matter in the least.

So when we see technical and scientific amateurs claiming that
Newton's laws somehow don't apply to their crude and unproven
inventions, they discredit themselves straightaway. Machines are
fundamentally Newtonian things. If they don't work according to
Newtonian principles, they simply don't work at all-- and it's doing
someone a favor to help end his waste of time and effort right
there.

No beleaguered genius has ever emerged from seclusion in his workshop
with a device that skirted Newton's physics or the laws of
thermodynamics. Many claimed to have done so, but they were all
mistaken or, more often, lying to attract gullible investors or even
just to attract attention. No global conspiracy by Big Oil is
necessary to explain their failures-- the villains are all far too
busy distorting markets and buying off politicians anyway.

The pattern is common enough to be mundane. When a small time tinker
claims to have accomplished the physically impossible, he's wrong.
One thousand point zero zero times out of a thousand, he's wrong.

Chalo
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Maxwells and Faradays formulations of induction
    ... >>I am not to have a quote mining war on account of Newton ... Classical mechanics or celestial motion reduced to terrestial ... > Descartes who tried to formulate mechanical laws, ... investiagating astronomy and the underlying geometry between observed ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Maxwells and Faradays formulations of induction
    ... Newton had some other task - to join separate results, ... Descartes who tried to formulate mechanical laws, ... difficult than to accuse others that they do not love the nature. ... the conception passes from hypothesis to the name of theory only after ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Maxwells and Faradays formulations of induction
    ... gravity; and it has never yet been explained how this matter accounts ... If you analysed Faraday why do you not analyse where Newton is talking ... In accordance with these laws, ... > and modern astronomy to the perfect absurdity. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: "Python" is not a good name, should rename to "Athon"
    ... on this silly "Newton" idea. ... His treatise Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica, ... described universal gravitation and the three laws ... consistency between Kepler's laws of planetary motion and his theory ...
    (comp.lang.python)
  • Re: Ether and Maxwells Permittivity
    ... Or is that Einstein being just more special than any? ... Newton, Maxwell, Lorentz/Poincare. ... turned into a crackpot. ... you have not addressed my many concerns with General Relativity. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Loading