Re: Androcles and Draper resume Einstein 1905

From: Androcles (dummy_at_dummy.net)
Date: 01/27/05 

Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 20:39:31 GMT

"PD" <pdraper@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1106849861.529307.7340@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Androcles wrote:
>> "PD" <pdraper@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1106840691.533504.303540@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>> > Androcles wrote:
>> >> "PD" <pdraper@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:1106779180.833103.16090@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>> >> > Androcles wrote:
>> >> >> "PD" <pdraper@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:1106771061.737238.62270@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>> >> >> > Androcles wrote:
>> >> >> >> "PD" <pdraper@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >> >> >>
> news:1106757592.092840.314450@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>> >> >> >> > Can you see the error here?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Yes, Einstein fucked up.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > Hint: According to Einstein, 2.0 Hz = 2.0 Hz.
>> >> >> >> Liar.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > Androcles, the reason for pointing this out is that, after
>> >> > coming
>> >> >> > to
>> >> >> >> > the conclusion that there is no point in trying to teach
> you
>> >> >> > someone
>> >> >> >> > else's theory, I thought it would be best to see if you
> can
>> >> > defend
>> >> >> >> > your
>> >> >> >> > own. After all, you're spending money to host a website
>> > riddled
>> >> >> > with
>> >> >> >> > simple, correctable errors.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> PD
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Why, if you think I've made an error, don't you point it
> out
>> >> > instead
>> >> >> > of
>> >> >> >> dropping hints?
>> >> >> >> Go on, embarrass me, I can take it.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Here it is.
>> >> >> >> http://www.androc1es.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/EDoppler.htm
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I'll defend it. Do your worst (or best, whatever)
>> >> >> >> Show my error and I'll withdraw the page.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > OK. It's rather simple, really.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Tau as you calculated it is the period of the light's
>> > oscillation.
>> >> > The
>> >> >> > units of tau, the period, are seconds/cycle.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > You correctly calculated the transformed period to be 0.5
>> > seconds
>> >> > per
>> >> >> > cycle.
>> >> >> > The period of an oscillation is the reciprocal of the
> frequency,
>> >> > which
>> >> >> > you can guess if you recall the units of frequency are Hz =
>> > cycles
>> >> > per
>> >> >> > second.
>> >> >> > Thus a period (a cycle, a tick, whatever) of 0.5 seconds
> means
>> > that
>> >> >> > there will be 2 ticks per second, not one tick per 2 seconds.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> < sputter, my beer went right up my nose. > LOL!
>> >> >>
>> >> >> You'll have to do better than that, Draper.
>> >> >> 2 ticks per second is 2 Hz.
>> >> >> 1 tick every 2 seconds is 0.5 Hz.
>> >> >
>> >> > That's right. And Hz is not a unit for tau.
>> >>
>> >> Yes'm Massa. Sho' thing, Massa. Dem tau is no unit for Hz, massa.
>> >>
>> >> Now, massa, I's a good student, massa, so if'n y'all will show me
>> >> where I sed it woz, massa, I'll be correcting mysel', massa.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > Hz is cycles per second.
>> >>
>> >> Sho' thing, massa, I'z reading y'all load and clear, massa.
>> >> Dem Hz is cycles per second, massa.
>> >>
>> >> > The units for tau is seconds per cycle.
>> >>
>> >> Now we gots us a problem dere, massa. Dat Einstein guy, he done
> say
>> >> dem tau was time, massa. Look in de book, massa.
>> >>
>> >> Here be de book, massa.
>> >> http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> He never done say dem tau was no Hz, massa. He done say
>> >> dat 'nu' was da Hz, massa. Is y'all having trouble w' da greek,
>> > massa?
>> >> If'n so, go see ma cuzin Willie, he done taught me all dat greek
> ***
>> >> long time ago, massa. I'z sho' he'd be only too happy teach a
> smart
>> > guy
>> >> like yo, massa.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Tau is not, and never can be,
>> >> > 0.5 Hz.
>> >>
>> >> Dat's right, massa. Sho' nuff. Einstein done say dem tau is time,
>> > massa.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Said more simply, 0.5 seconds per cycle is not, and never will
>> >> > be 0.5 Hz.
>> >>
>> >> Dat's right, massa. Sho' nuff. Dem Hz aint never gonna be 1/ Hz.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Take the page down.
>> >>
>> >> Sho' thing, massa. Jest as soon as y'all kin find summat wrong,
>> > massa,
>> >> coz up till now all you've done is made a complete fucking idiot
> of
>> >> yourself.
>> >
>> > *SIGH*
>> > I will try one more time.
>>
>> You are wasting your time.
>> If you want to learn, I'll teach, but I expect you to do your
> homework.
>> The first thing is to learn the greek alphabet, which you do not seem
>> to know. Otherwise go back to sighing.
>>
>>
>> >
>> >>From your page:
>> > "Let a clock emit a frequency of 1.0 Hz be moving relative to an
>> > observer with velocity 0.866c."
>>
>> That's right, ducky.
>>
>> >
>> > I note that you don't transform frequency right away.
>>
>> Yes, well, you are supposed to know f = 1/t, that's a prerequisite
> for
>> this course.
>> If you need to revise the previous grade, go away and do so now. This
>
>> course
>> cannot be taken unless you have passed the previous.
>> I don't teach the greek alphabet either. Go and learn it first.
>>
>> > You do that
>> > later. First thing you do is transform a time. A time between what?
> A
>> > TIME BETWEEN TICKS. Agree? Yes or no. [Q1] We'll need this decision
>> > later.
>>
>> Go home and revise, I'm not here to teach you last weeks material.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > A frequency of 1.0 Hz = 1.0 cycles per second then corresponds to a
>> > period (a time between ticks) of 1.0 seconds per cycle =
> 1/frequency.
>> > This is what you are transforming, sticking into t in the equation
>> > that
>> > follows the quoted line above. Agree? Yes or no.
>>
>> Go home and revise, I'm not here to teach you last weeks material,
> and
>> quit wasting time. You are holding up the rest of the class. You
> should
>> have
>> done your homework, I'll see you in detention, Draper.
>>
>>
>> [Q2] If your answer to
>> > Q2 is NO, then tell me what number you are putting in for t in the
>> > equation and how you got it.
>> >
>> > After the transformation, you get tau, which has the same units as
> t
>> > on
>> > the right hand side of the equation. Thus, if your answer to Q1 is
>> > yes,
>> > then your units for tau are also time between ticks. The time
> between
>> > ticks is called a period.
>>
>>
>> I'll speak to you in detention, Draper. You should have learnt this
>> a grade ago. Why are you only now revising in my class?
>>
>> >
>> > If your answer to Q1 is yes and the answer to Q2 is yes, then t is
> a
>> > time between ticks, i.e. the period of the oscillation, and tau is
> the
>> > transformed period of oscillation. To get from tau to a frequency,
> you
>> > must take the reciprocal of that number, because frequency has
> units
>> > time in the *denominator*. If your answer to Q1 is no, then how are
>
>> > you
>> > associating the result of the transformation with a frequency, any
>> > frequency? [Q4] Frequency is only related to only one variable with
>> > units time, the period. If the result you have is NOT the period,
> then
>> > you can't make any association with a frequency.
>> >
>> > Again, I'll quote from YOUR site:
>> > ========================
>> > t = 0.5 seconds
>> > = 1 tick per 2 seconds
>> > [...]
>> > = 0.5Hz
>> > ========================
>> > And I'll ask you one more time.
>> > Is 0.5 seconds = 0.5 Hz? [Q5]
>> > YES OR NO?
>>
>> You've misquoted. I have clearly said
>> tau = 0.5 seconds.
>> Learn the greek alphabet.
>
> Nice stall. Again, I'll quote from YOUR site.
> =============
> "tau = 0.5 seconds
> = 1 tick per 2 seconds"
> [... = ] "0.5 Hz"
> =============
> And I'll ask you one more time.
> Is 0.5 seconds = 0.5 Hz? [Q5]
> YES OR NO?

Ok, so I should have written

 tau = 0.5 seconds
[ so that we have ] or [or] 1 tick per 2 seconds = 0.5 Hz.

Well done, you've found a minor grammatical error. I'll take the page
down and correct it when I have time.
Have a pat on the back and become a secretary. Nice stall.

>
> And I repeat:
> If you say NO to [Q5], and you do not take down the webpage, as you
> promised, then I will know that you are a liar, and a belligerent one
> at that.

Oh, I'll take it down and put it right back up again as a revision.
Thank you for finding a trivial problem for me.

>>> >> I'll defend it. Do your worst (or best, whatever)
>>> >> Show my error and I'll withdraw the page.
>
> If you say YES to [Q5] and do not defend your answer, as promised,
> then I will know that you are a liar, and an uneducated one at that.
>>> >> I'll defend it. Do your worst (or best, whatever)
>>> >> Show my error and I'll withdraw the page.
>
> If you do not answer [Q5], as promised, then I will know that you are
> a liar, and a cowardly one at that.

I've answered it. You are right, I made a trivial error. I'll correct it
and put up a new page to replace it.
Now show that Einstein is claiming 2.0 Hz = 2.0 Hz.
If you do not, then it will confirmed that you are
a liar, and a cowardly one at that.

Androcles.

>>> >> I'll defend it. Do your worst (or best, whatever)
>>> >> Show my error and I'll withdraw the page.
>
> PD
>
>
>>
>> Androcles.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > And since you apparently did not read the high-school website I
> linked
>> > to below, I'll quote it:
>> > ===============
>> > Frequency and period are distinctly different, yet related,
>> > quantities.
>> > Frequency refers to how often something happens; period refers to
> the
>> > time it takes something to happen. Frequency is a rate quantity;
>> > period
>> > is a time quantity. Frequency is the cycles/second; period is the
>> > seconds/cycle. As an example of the distinction and the relatedness
> of
>> > frequency and period, consider a woodpecker that drums upon a tree
> at
>> > a
>> > periodic rate. If the woodpecker drums upon a tree 2 times in one
>> > second, then the frequency is 2 Hz; each drum must endure for
> one-half
>> > a second, so the period is 0.5 s. If the woodpecker drums upon a
> tree
>> > 4
>> > times in one second, then the frequency is 4 Hz; each drum must
> endure
>> > for one-fourth a second, so the period is 0.25 s. If the woodpecker
>> > drums upon a tree 5 times in one second, then the frequency is 5
> Hz;
>> > each drum must endure for one-fifth a second, so the period is 0.2
> s.
>> > Do you observe the relationship? Mathematically, the period is the
>> > reciprocal of the frequency and vice versa.
>> > =============
>> >
>> > If you say NO to [Q5], and you do not take down the webpage, as you
>> > promised, then I will know that you are a liar, and a belligerent
> one
>> > at that.
>> >> >> >> I'll defend it. Do your worst (or best, whatever)
>> >> >> >> Show my error and I'll withdraw the page.
>> >
>> > If you say YES to [Q5] and do not defend your answer, as promised,
>> > then
>> > I will know that you are a liar, and an uneducated one at that.
>> >> >> >> I'll defend it. Do your worst (or best, whatever)
>> >> >> >> Show my error and I'll withdraw the page.
>> >
>> > If you do not answer [Q5], as promised, then I will know that you
> are
>> > a
>> > liar, and a cowardly one at that.
>> >> >> >> I'll defend it. Do your worst (or best, whatever)
>> >> >> >> Show my error and I'll withdraw the page.
>> >
>> > PD
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >> And you teach? LOL!!!
>> >> >
>> >> > Usually the teachable. You're the first exception to that rule.
>> >>
>> >> I'm not teachable by you mate. I had a real education. Why, I even
>> >> know the difference between nu and tau.
>> >>
>> >> Do the noble thing, Draper. Go and earn an honest living stacking
>> >> shelves in a grocery store instead of masquerading as an educator.
>> >> Give the kids a chance in life.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Androcles.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > tau = 0.5 seconds/cycle ==> f = 1/tau = 2.0 Hz.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Whereas, on your site, you clearly say:
>> >> >> > t = 0.5 seconds
>> >> >> > = 1 tick per 2 seconds
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I take it the page will come down tonight, per your promise.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Don't believe me? Here's a high school physics link, if you'd
>> > like:
>> >> >> >
>> > http://www.glenbrook.k12.il.us/gbssci/phys/Class/waves/u10l2b.html
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Shall we move on to the next page on your site? I think I see
> an
>> >> > error
>> >> >> > there, too.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > PD
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> The clock emits 1 Hz (in its own frame of reference)
>> >> >> >> Let's say it emits a flash of light once a second.
>> >> >> >> Because moving clocks (according to Einstein) run slow,
>> >> >> >> the observer sees 1 flash of light every 2 seconds, by his
> own
>> >> > clock.
>> >> >> >> So, emission rate, 1 Hz.
>> >> >> >> Observed rate, 0.5 Hz.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> SO FAR, nowhere is Einstein claiming 2.0 Hz.
>> >> >> >> Do carry on.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Androcles
>> >> >> >
>> >> >
>> >
>

Quantcast