Re: APPEARANCE and REALITY
From: Dirk Van de moortel (dirkvandemoortel_at_ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com)
Date: 06/22/04
- Next message: Dirk Van de moortel: "Re: OWLS measurement"
- Previous message: Bilge: "Re: Light speed invariance"
- In reply to: Androcles: "Re: APPEARANCE and REALITY"
- Next in thread: Bilge: "Re: APPEARANCE and REALITY"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 08:43:10 GMT
"Androcles" <androc1es@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:P8RBc.2526$hh7.22565087@news-text.cableinet.net...
>
> "Dirk Van de moortel" <dirkvandemoortel@ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com> wrote
> in message news:MSEBc.162314$e31.8126580@phobos.telenet-ops.be...
> |
> | "Androcles" <androc1es@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:7jEBc.1898$px.17453157@news-text.cableinet.net...
> | >
> | > "George Marklin" <marklin@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> | > news:Y3sBc.8712$w07.4075@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> |
> | [snip]
> |
> | > | And doesn't that make it a better theory?
> | >
> | > Since both are wrong, both are bad theories.
> | > http://www.androc1es.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
> | > Androcles
> |
> | Where one finds theories by the "electronic engineer" who laughs is
> | ass off when someone writes:
> | sqrt(4) = 2
> | -sqrt(4) = -2
> | sqrt(x^2) = x for all x >= 0
> | sqrt(x^2) = -x for all x <= 0
> | http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/SqrtRev.html
> |
> | Dirk Vdm
> How idiotic can you be?
> Go on, build a record of your stupidity. Keep pushing your own fumble on
> Google over and over, you are obviously too stupid to see it. Here, I'll rub
> your nose in it, peanut head.
> Let y = x^2
> Now choose some values for x, such as -2, 0, 2.
> Values for y are 4, 0, 4
> Now, are there any other values for y?
> Nope.
Indeed not.
> And what does the moron claim?
> sqrt(y) = x for all x >= 0
> sqrt(y) = -x for all x <= 0
Yes, take x = -2
sqrt(4) = 2 = - (-2) = - x
(MINUS (MINUS 2)) EQUALS 2
It hurts, doesn't it?
> Now, that just happens to be almost true.
> What did I say YEARS ago, that you, Dinky the Deranged, posted as a fumble
> in
> http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/ImmortalFumbles.html#SqrtRev
> As the rest of the world knows, sqrt() has two solutions,
No, sqrt is a positive number.
You REALY ABSOLUTELY HONESTLY do NOT
see it, do you???
> but I doubt you
> realized it is possible to put a car in reverse without moving the
> headlights to the back of the car, moron, but if we do use reverse, then
> according to you and your "-sqrt(4) = -2",
> xi = (x - [-v]t) / -sqrt(1- [-v]^2/c^2) = -(x +vt) * gamma
> tau = (t -[-v]x) / -sqrt(1- [-v]^2/c^2) = -(t+vx) * gamma.
> Obviously (oops, BLATANTLY obviously) you think putting a car in reverse
> causes its time to run backwards. You and your fellow relativists are total
> idiots, athough not all the others are spermless.
> Androcles, ROFLMAO.
In the contect of real numbers Sqrt is a function that takes
real positive (or zero) numbers and produces a real positive
(or zero) number.
This results in the following identities:
sqrt(4) = 2
-sqrt(4) = -2
sqrt(x^2) = x for all x >= 0
sqrt(x^2) = -x for all x <= 0
sqrt(x^2) = |x|
This way sqrt is ALWAYS positive.
The only thing one can say, when dealing with real
numbers is
Let x^2 = 5
then
x = sqrt(5) or x = -sqrt(5)
Show me ANY technical article in an engineering or physics
book where sqrt is to be interpreted as a negative number
and I will tell the world that I am a moron.
Do you realize what an INCREDIBLY STUPID donkey
you are?
http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/SqrtRev.html
http://www.androc1es.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Dinkyfumblezero.htm
http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/SqrtAnswers.html
"Electronic engineer" you said?
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
Dirk Vdm
- Next message: Dirk Van de moortel: "Re: OWLS measurement"
- Previous message: Bilge: "Re: Light speed invariance"
- In reply to: Androcles: "Re: APPEARANCE and REALITY"
- Next in thread: Bilge: "Re: APPEARANCE and REALITY"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
