Re: a relative question


"PD" <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1186832786.780203.139610@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
: On Aug 10, 12:12 pm, "Androcles" <Engin...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
: > "PD" <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
: >
: > news:1186764851.973006.158820@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
: > : On Aug 10, 11:44 am, "Androcles" <Engin...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
: > : > "PD" <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
: > : >
: > : >news:1186755698.876037.238180@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
: > : > : On Aug 10, 8:56 am, "Androcles" <Engin...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
: > : > : > "PD" <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
: > : > :
: > : > : > :
: > : > : > Right enough, the LHC isn't on line yet.
: > : > :
: > : > : I didn't say anything that relied on LHC results.
: > : >
: > : > The OP said (which you snipped to hide your voluntary ignorance):
: > : >
: > : > "I asked a couple of respondants whether there is experimental
evidence
: > that
: > : > the energy
: > : > released in the collision ever exceeds m(of the accelerated
object)c^2."
: > :
: > : And there has been.
: >
: > Oh well, the velocity must have exceeded c then, or someone got their
hard
: > sums
: > wrong. Was it the transverse mass or the longitudinal mass?
: >
: > http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img155.gif
: >
: > : I gave an example from LEP, which does not rely on
: > : any results from LHC.
: > :
: > : The OP, by the way, noted that this was exactly the answer he was
: > : looking for.
: >
: > Yeah, Catholic want to believe in the immaculate conception.
: >
: > :
: > : >
: > : > Conservation of energy requires that the energy released in the
: > collision
: > : > NEVER
: > : > exceeds m(of the accelerated object)c^2;
: > :
: > : No it doesn't. What conservation of energy thingie do you think says
: > : that?
: >
: > That's my question for you, I don't claim the energy released in the
: > collision exceeds m(of the accelerated object)c^2, whereas you do.
: > What conservation of energy thingie do you think says that?
: >
: > :
: > : > only you, St. Einstein the Divine
: > : > Fuckwit
: > : > and your god(s) can create more energy than was present in the
: > collision.
: > :
: > : I didn't say that.
: >
: > Yes you did, you definitely wrote "And there has been", disgusting
liar.
: > Caught in a lie again, Phuckwit Duck, and now denying yourself.
: > That's the onanism of ignorance, you wanker.
:
: No, sir. I said that the final state contained more energy than what
: was in m(of the accelerated object)c^2, not more energy than what was
: contained in the collision. You seem to think they're the same thing.
: You're wrong. Not the first time for you.

You definitely wrote "And there has been" in response to "energy
released in the collision", the OP did not say "contained".
That's the onanism of ignorance, you wanker.




.

Loading