Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.


Sorcerer wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1151518607.218930.320160@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
| Sorcerer wrote:
| > "PD" <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:1151496744.924923.260870@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > |
| > | Sorcerer wrote:
| > | > "PD" <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > | > news:1151443331.684517.255630@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | > |
| > | > | Sorcerer wrote:
| > | > | > "tomgee" <tyropress@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > | > | > news:1151431530.173601.106530@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | > | >
| > | > | > PD believes anyone that doesn't follow his religion is showing
| > | > "*exactly*
| > | > | > what is wrong with their thinking. I call that bigotry, because
no
| > | > matter
| > | > | > how
| > | > | > you argue with him, he'll always be right in his eyes. He is the
| > typical
| > | > | > shithead
| > | > | > and arsehole.
| > | > | > Androcles
| > | > |
| > | > | In your case, Androcles, it's pretty plain what's wrong with your
| > | > | thinking. It's a pretty short trip following your thinking before
you
| > | > | run into something that's patently wrong.
| > | > |
| > | > | Like how muons that are superluminal will leave the same amount of
| > | > | energy in a scintillator regardless of their initial speed, and
still
| > | > | come out to be just under c by the time they leave the
scintillator.
| > | > | You say, "I don't know HOW it does that, but it's sure more
believable
| > | > | than time dilation." Apparently, to spit out something you thing
is
| > | > | hogwash, you'd be happy to swallow something from further down the
| > | > | colon.
| > | > |
| > | >
| > | > I was talking about you, not to you.
| > | > You say a muon slows down in a scintillator
| > |
| > | I did? Where did I say that?
| > | Liar.
| > "Like how muons that are superluminal will leave the same amount of
| > energy in a scintillator regardless of their initial speed, and still
| > come out to be just under c by the time they leave the scintillator." -
| > ***.
|
| I was referring to YOUR thinking, not mine, Androcles.

I know, arsehole, and I'm referring to yours. You say a muon slows down
(i.e. loses energy) in a scintillator, slowing to subluminal < c.

Yes indeed. It was subluminal before hitting the scintillator and
subluminal after hitting the scintillator. It slows an itty bit in the
scintillator, about 2 MeV/cm.



| Pay attention.
| Wipe the foam off your mouth, too, it's gotten on your glasses and
| impaired your reading.

Wipe your mouth out with soap, jackass. Your glasses need cleaning
and that impairs your writing.

| >
| >
| >
| >
| > |
| > | >and you don't know how
| > | > it does that,
| > |
| > | I don't? Where did I say that?
| > | Liar.
| >
| > Oh, you do know how they lose energy without slowing down.... do tell us
| > all, ***.
|
| I know how they lose energy when they slow down.

See, you say muons slow down, and when I say you say it, you say I'm a
liar, you ***.

Note the difference, you say it slows from superluminal to subluminal
speeds.

It's a pretty short trip following your thinking
before anyone runs into something that's patently wrong.
(Not that you've ever measured the speed of a muon before it's going
into a scintillator.)

Sure I have. Ever heard of a muon beamline?

Anyway, the aurora are Cherenkov radiation, so clearly
particles entering atmosphere are superluminal.

They don't travel faster that c. They travel faster than c/n, at least
for a while.


| I didn't say that I
| don't know how it does that. You did. Would you like a reference to
| where you said that?

I know what you said, shithead. of course I said you don't know.
You didn't know how the aurorae glow, either, until I told you.

|
| >
| >
| > |
| > | >so it must have gone in at just under c = 0/0 and come
| > | > out at c = 1/0. <shrug>
| > |
| > | c = 299,792,458 m/s (or 1, depending on your system of units).
| > | Are you a bonehead, Androcles? Why yes, yes, I believe you are.
| >
| > See what I mean? No matter how you argue with him, he'll always be
right in
| > his eyes.
| > He is the typical shithead and arsehole.
| > The speed of light from A to B is AB/(tB-tA) = 299,792,458 m/s
|
| Yes indeed.
Yes indeed.
|
| > whereas c from A to A is 0/(t'A-tA) = 0/0 m/s.
|
| No, that's not a speed during a round-trip, that's the magnitude of the
| velocity on a round-trip. Do you not know the difference?

There is no velocity for a round trip, arsehole. Velocity is a vector,
it has both direction and magnitude, not two directions.

Really? This seems like a pretty common problem in basic physics
textbooks. Billy runs around a closed track and crosses the finish line
at the same point he started the race. What is his average *velocity*
during this race? Would you like a textbook reference for a problem
just like this one? I bet it even has an answer in the back of the
book.

Or do you want to dispute the Newtonian mechanics that is taught in
freshman physics books?

Wait, you're an ex-engineer aren't you? Didn't you have to pass this
class at some point?



|
| You're a math major. You know the difference between an average of
| magnitudes and a magnitude of an average?
|
| > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/DominoEffect.GIF
| > Everybody knows a constant velocity reverses direction, don't you,
Phuckwit
| > ***?
| > Us boneheads will continue with speed of light from A to B is AB/(tB-tA)
=
| > 299,792,458 m/s
|
| That's fine.

Of course it is. Everybody knows a constant velocity reverses direction,
don't you, Phuckwit ***?
The speed of light = 299,792,458 m/s, the symbol c = 0/0 because
"the velocity of light in our theory plays the part, physically, of an
infinitely great velocity."- IFC Einstein

Phuckwit Duck plays the part, physically, of a Phuckwit ***.


Androcles.



|
| > leaving you phuckwits in the dust.
| >
| > Androcles.
|

.

Quantcast