Re: Wheres weirdo?

On Sep 14, 12:17 pm, HighQ <einstein...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 14 Sep, 15:55, Prof Weird <pol...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sep 14, 3:38 am, spintronic <spintro...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 13 Sep, 20:51, Prof Weird <pol...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sep 13, 1:14 pm, spintronic <spintro...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 13 Sep, 17:51, Boikat <boi...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sep 13, 11:34 am, spintronic <spintro...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I have a biological conundrum I want to ask him.

After he & his peers solve the reducing mass problem.

There is no reducing mass problem, unless you're talking about how it
seems your brain seems to be getting smaller, and smaller, and
smaller...

Boikat

I think he's hiding.

Much like you 'thought' I had run from another of your threads ?  Or
couldn't solve a math problem ?

"Come out come out whereever you are, come meet the young spinbrainy
bout to bite you in the arse".

Great - you seem to have shifted your psychotic fixations from Ye Olde
One's anatomy onto mine.  Gross !

The 'reducing mass problem' exists only within your deranged
imagination, wrought from a combination of utter ignorance,
mathematical errors, and astounding arrogance (most people, when they
notice their math doesn't quite add up, assume they did something
wrong or don't know enough about the system; you assume every
physicist for last 70 years missed something that only you noticed)..

In your 'model', if a 0.49 kg of mass is converted into photons, it
carries momentum (0.49 kg x c) kg m/sec to the right; therefore, the
remaining ** 0.51 KG ** must have sufficient velocity to equal that
momentum.  It is a straight forward conservation of momentum problem.

Solved it several times already

No you haven't.

Actually, I have.  You just refuse to accept the answers (since they
don't conform to your delusions).

- the remaining ** 0.51 KG ** is
moving at 0.6928 m/sec

That's not very fast.

I meant to type '0.6928 c' - LIKE I HAVE EVERY OTHER TIME I SOLVED THE
EQUATIONS.

Mistake 1.

Given that I have solved the conservation of momentum equations
several times, and v = 0.6928c (or about 2.07703 x 10^8 m/sec), where
is the mistake spintwitty ? (or do you just call observations of
reality that do not conform to your delusions 'mistakes' ?)

because you must use the equation for
relativistic momentum ( p = m x v/sqrt (1 - v^2/c^2), then solve for v
of that )

My dear little weirdo, *HOW THE FLUFF* can you *USE*
mv (<-------NOTE THE **v**----) in an equation you are using to solve
for v?

Quite easily if you know BOTH p (the momentum) and the mass (m) :  p =
mv/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
Square both sides : p^2 = m^2 v^2/(1-v^2/c^2)

Mistake 2.

Weirdo, refuses to define "mass".

*IF* he uses "relativistic mass" = 0.51Kg, he agrees with me.

*If* he uses "Rest Mass" he agrees with me that it has reduced.

That's called a *CLASSICAL* mistake.

Where did I agree that anything has been reduced ?

The rest mass IS 0.51 kg - it is the part of the rocket AT REST before
0.49 kg is converted into photons.
The RELATIVISTIC MASS would be .707 kg - when the 0.51 kg mass is
boosted to 0.6928 c.

That equation shows how to calculate the RELATIVISTIC momentum - which
is what you SHOULD be using instead of your deranged interpretations.

Takes a little effort, but v can be isolated on one side of the
equation and solved.

Yawn.

and NOT the one you seem to be using ( p = mv, solving for v
as v = c x m_f/m_r )

I'm not using that. I'm using the only possible equation available at
this point.

v = p_r / (E_r/C^2)  to you that would simplify to
v_r = p_r / "relativistic mass"

No, that's a disguised NEWTONIAN equation

What, did it have a mask on?

Mistake 3).

The mistake is yours if you called THAT a mistake spintwitty.

Here's WHY you are in error spintwitty :

(where m is independent of
v); for a RELATIVISTIC EQUATION, m is dependent upon v (ie,
RELATIVISTIC MOMENTUM = m x v/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)

Which does explain WHY you invoked the limit of : 'at MOST 0.5 kg can
be converted !!111!!!' (without that 'limit', your idiocy would've
been visible right off the bat)

I didn't invoke it, the universe did.

No, you did to disguise just how munged up your understanding is.

Mistake 4)

I call that "babel", or (confusion of languages)

No mistake on my part; your 'limit' only happens in your deranged
system where a 0.51 kg mass AT REST can resist the momentum imparted
by a multi-megaton explosion from converting 0.49 kg of matter into
photons.

In reality, there is no limit - the space shuttle's FUEL far outweighs
it.

The space shuttle doesn't fire photonic energy.
(You do know the difference right?)

Mistake 5)

Not on my part; WHY should a hypothetical photon drive conform to your
delusions ?

The difference is what again - according to YOU, it is 'IMPOSSIBLE FOR
ANYTHING TO DUMP MORE THAN 50% OF ITS MASS INTO ACCELERATION'.

Self explanitory. Photonic energy *CANNOT* impart more then E/C
momentum in the
opposite direction.

You have yet to do more that ASSERT that spintwitty.

Why, for example, COULDN'T a 10 kg rocket convert 9 kg of its mass
into photons (other than the fact that your delusions will not permit
it) ?

By YOUR calculations, 0.49 kg converted into photons has a momentum of
1.468971 x 10^8 kg m/sec to the right.

1.468971 x 10^8 = (0.51 kg) x v/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) to the left to
CONSERVE MOMENTUM.

Solving for v gives 0.6928 c.

And I'm pretty sure the Apollo capsule didn't weigh as much as the
Saturn rocket it was sitting on.

Did that fire photons for thrust too?

Relevant why,

Mistake 6).

Also called (Being Dumb)

In other words, spintwitty cannot justify his 50% 'limit', and so is
reduced to stomping his foot and calling every statement that shows he
is wrong a 'mistake'.

given you bellowed that 'it is IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANYTHING
TO DUMP MORE THAN 50% OF ITS MASS INTO ACCELERATION' ?

Mistake 7)

Repeating your own mistakes.

spintwitty once again demonstrates his habit of calling any statement
that shows he is wrong a 'mistake'.

Unless, of course, you can 'explain' how 1 - 0.49 = 0.501 ...

or how

0.6928 m/sec = 207696215m/s

(You'll find your typo is a bigger blunder than mine)

0.6928 c = 2.07703 x 10^8 m/sec, and your math still sucks.

Mistake 8)

299 792 458 * 0.6928 = 207 696 215

Google yourself.

Why use so many figures ? I use 2.9979 x 10^8 for simplicity.

 So perhaps after all is said & done, you will explain the
*CONSERVATION*
of energy for us all.

Now unless i'm very very simple.

Yes, you ARE quite simple.

Mistake 9)

Never underestimate your opponent.

It is not humanly possible to underestimate you spintwitty.

1 - 0.49 = 0.51.

Not according to you, since you kept whining about the remaining 0.501
kg ..

Mistake 10)

Never go on about a 1.76470588% error when yours is 99.9999997%

Too bad that none of my non-typo errors is anywhere near that big.

In terms of energy, that's

1Kg * c^2 - 0.49*c^2 = 0.51 * c^2

But you seem to have this;

((0.51 * ((2.99792458 * (10^8))^2)) / sqrt(1 - (((0.6928 * (2.99792458
* (10^8)))^2) / ((2.99792458 * (10^8))^2)))) / ((2.99792458 * (10^8))
^2) = 0.707223601

Or translated;

1Kg - 0.49Kg = 0.707223601Kg.

That is not even close - your 'interpretation' of the equation boils
down to (m_r * c^2*gamma)/c^2, or the energy of a 0.51 kg mass moving
at 0.6928 c. THERE IS NO SUBTRACTION THERE !

You munged the equations yet again spintwitty.

Mistake 11) *NEVER* call an equation wrong when it's there in
plain sight.

You 'forgot' you were working with ENERGY - you should have calculated
the ENERGY in a 1 kg mass, then subtracted out the ENERGY of a 0.51 kg
mass moving at 0.6928 c. In this case, remaining mass = 0.292751815
kg.

Some of the ENERGY from converting 0.49 kg into photons was obviously
shunted into the remaining 0.51 kg to get it up to 0.6928 c (which
looks like a loss of mass from the 0.49 kg side).

That's how much ENERGY is in the remaining ** 0.51 kg ** since it is
moving at 0.6928 c.

Mistake 12)

Never claim that there is 0.707223601KgC^2 energy remaining in
0.51KgC^2.

Why not, since that IS how much ENERGY is in a 0.51 kg mass moving at
0.6928c.

Once again simpleton : a .51 kg mass MOVING AT 0.6928 c has the same
amount of ENERGY as a 0.707248 kg mass AT REST. You seem to have this
pathological need to ignore the FACT that the 0.51 kg mass is moving.

 The actual equation is : E = gamma x m x c^2, or m = E/gamma x c^2.

Mistake 13)

Never claim there is ever more energy than 0.51KgC^2, when you take
0.49KgC^2
from 1KgC^2 of energy.

If 0.49 kg c^2 momentum goes to the RIGHT, an equal amount of momentum
MUST go to the left.

In this case, p = (0.49 * c^2) = (0.51) x v/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2), or v =
0.6928 c.

Some of the ENERGY from the 0.49 kg mass was used to get the 0.51 kg
mass to that velocity. You'd have to have your head shoved 3.14 feet
up your own arse to NOT notice that.

Once again, you 'forgot' to take into account the FACT that the
remaining ** 0.51 kg ** is moving, and used the WRONG EQUATION.

Mistake 14)

Never claim that a moving 0.51Kg is equal to a resting 0.51Kg.

I never did - I specifically STATED that a 0.51 kg mass MOVING at
0.6928 c has the same ENERGY as a 0.707 kg mass AT REST.

Once again, simpleton :

Mistake 15)

Never call spin a simpleton.

Again, any statement that offends spintwitty is decreed a 'mistake',
no matter how accurate the statement is.

If you convert 0.49 kg of matter into photons, that is a momentum of
1.468971 x 10^8 kg m/sec going to the right.

THEREFORE, the remaining ** 0.51 kg ** must be moving at a particular
v so the MOMENTUM IS EQUAL.

Mistake 16)

Never claim that a rest mass is moving, has more energy that its rest
mass,
and then blame it on the momentum.

Good thing I never did that !

IF 0.49 kg of matter of a rocket AT REST is converted into photons, it
has momentum 1.468971 x 10^8 kg m/sec to the right.

The remaining 0.51 kg AT REST must gain sufficient velocity to balance
the momentum - in this case, reach a speed of 0.6928 c.

Therefore, given that RELATIVISTIC MOMENTUM is : p = m x v/sqrt(1-v^2/
c^2),

v solves out to 0.6928c.  The remaining ** 0.51 kg ** is moving at
2.07703 x 10^8 m/sec (or 0.6928 c).

Mistake 17)

Never claim;

1) 0.51KgC^2 is the rest energy.

What else WOULD it be ?

2) 0.51KgC^2 moving at 0.6928C is also the rest energy

I never said that WAS the rest energy, for if it is moving, HOW CAN IT
BE AT REST ?!

3) (0.707223601Kg + 0.49Kg)C^2 = 1KgC^2 is the total energy

I never stated that either. If you subtract out the ENERGY of the
0.51 kg mass MOVING AT 0.6928c from the energy of a 1 kg mass AT REST,
the remaining 'mass' is only about 0.29275 kg.

In succession.

That is the same energy as a 0.707248 kg mass AT REST, or a 0.51 kg
mass moving at 0.6928 c.

Mistake 18)

Never repeat mistake 17 twice in consecutive order.

Translation : these statements do not conform to spintwitty's
delusions; therefore, he will call them 'mistakes'.

In other words you gibbering mattoid, some of the energy from the 0.49
kg mass was transferred to the 0.51 kg mass.

Mistake 19)

Never throw energy about as if it's candy.
If it goes from one place, that place is deficit.

And in this case, the deficit is in what escapes the system. 1 - .
70725 = .29275.

Turning 0.49 kg into photons WITHOUT A MOMENTUM TRANSFER (as in, just
blowing it up), you could condense the energy back down to the full
0.49 kg of energy later.

Since there was a 0.51 kg mass that was accelerated, it is quite
obvious to anyone that doesn't have their head shoved up their own
arse that some of that energy was diverted to the mass to get it to
sufficient velocity to CONSERVE MOMENTUM.

(unless you know of a way to negate conservation of momentum, or have
a 0.51 kg weight resist the force of a multi-megaton explosion and NOT
move)

Mistake 20)

When all else fails, Never never use nuclear weopons to prove you
right.

Too bad it does - your 'math' requires a 0.51 kg mass to NOT move when
hit with tremendous amounts of photon momentum.

If you use the WRONG equation to solve for m as you do (ie, m = E/
c^2), you'd get 0.707248 kg;

Mistake 21)

Never use a spin equation whose result is 0.51, to pretend it equates
to 0.707
just to cover your own ass.

Too bad the 'spin equation' is merely your deranged 'interpretation'.

The ENERGY of a 0.51 kg mass moving at 0.6928 c is the same as a
0.70728 kg mass AT REST.

Your equation did not take that into account - you figured the energy
for a mass AT REST, when it clearly cannot be at rest.

The equation I used (m = E/gamma x c^2) does take that into account.

if you take into account the FACT that the mass is moving and use the
CORRECT equation ( m = E/gamma x c^2), you
would indeed find that m = 0.51 kg.

Mistake 22,23 &24)

Never assume 0.51Kg moving at 0.6928C is equal to 0.51Kg.

I never did; I SPECIFICALLY STATED that the energy of a 0.51 kg mass
moving at 0.6928c is equal to a 0.707 kg mass AT REST.

Never assume m = (E/gamma * C^2) is a valid equation.

Translation : this reality-based equation does not support
spintwitty's delusions, so he DEMANDS that you ignore it.

Never assume that 0.51Kg is anything other than the Relativistic Mass
in this setup.

The 0.51 kg mass is the REST mass; once it starts moving, it has
greater relativistic mass.

Now that I have yet again shown my math and WHY you are a blithering
idiot,

Mistake 25&26)

Never boast about ***.

There is no '***' to boast about; merely a demonstration that you are
a bellowing philodox that hopes rancor, bile and arrogance can
substitute for comprehension and understanding (hint : they don't)

Never claim that presenting it, proves your point.

Translation : 'stop showing that spintwitty is wrong !111!11!!'

what 'biological conundrum' are you going to vomit out upon the
board ?

Mistake 27)

I never had one. I just wanted to get you out of hiding.

How is your LYING a mistake on my part ?

.