Re: More speed confusion


"G" <gehan.ameresekere@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:8090bb94-6528-477e-add0-a33ec4e71c11@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On May 29, 1:59 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Peter Riedt" <rie...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:8019d7ca-8f18-4104-a6a2-a6cbb5f54f54@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On May 28, 11:37 am, "Androcles" <Headmas...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



"Peter Riedt" <rie...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:8a726271-3b2e-4921-87d9-304578c6c705@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On May 28, 2:57 am, "Androcles" <Headmas...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Peter Riedt" <rie...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:5c5ba431-1bc6-4b43-9195-3f80e7a78b70@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On May 27, 3:30 am, "Paul B. Andersen"

<paul.b.ander...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Peter Riedt wrote:
Androcles, excellent and comprehensive derivation resulting in the
answer 1=1.

To which I like to add, if we add the speed of light to any other
speed up to 300000km/sec, the answer is always 300000km/sec but if
we
subtract the speed of an object from the speed of light using the
formula(c-v)/(1+c*v/c^2)[negative closing speed as in source and
target approaching each other] the result is less than c-v e.g.
for 300000km/sec-30km/sec the composite speed is not 299970km/sec
but
299940.006km/sec. However if both c and v are 300000km/sec, they
approach each other at a whopping c-v = 0km/sec!

Peter Riedt

The correct formula is: (c-v)/(1-c*v/c^2) = c

--
Paul

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/

Paul, agreed.
(300000-300000)/(1-300000*300000/300000*300000)=0

========================================
So you agree Tusseladd's c = 0.
You are both raving mad and YOU, Riedt, left out the
parentheses!

(300000-300000)/(1- [300000*300000]/[300000*300000])

=(300000-300000)/(1-90000000000/90000000000)
=(300000-300000)/(1-1)
= 0/0
= Divide by zero.

FAILED!

Riedt's gaffe:
(300000-300000)/(1-300000*300000/300000*300000)=0

Parsing left to right,
(300000-300000)/(1-90000000000/300000*300000)

(300000-300000)/(1-30000*300000)
(300000-300000)/(1-90000000000)
0/ (-89999999999) = 0

But c-v = 0 when v = c anyway, you pair of idiotic cretins.

For Riedt's education:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsing

(Follow-ups set to alt.morons )- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Androcles, if you insert additional parentheses as you did, the answer
is division by zero
=============================================
That's what the spread*** says!

but if you leave it as Paul suggested i.e. (c-v)/
(1-c*v/c^2, the answer is 0.
============================================

Tusseladd can no more pull equations out of his arse than Einstein can.
Einstein's idiotic equation is given in
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img76.gif
(LOOK IT UP!)

"It follows, further, that the velocity of light c cannot be altered by
composition with a velocity less than that of light. For this case we
obtain
V = (c+w) / (1+ w/c) = c

It doesn't matter if you use u, v, or w for the velocity, it is still
the
velocity.

If we set w = -v (i.e. travel backwards), then we can directly
substitute:
V = (c+ -v) / (1+ -v/c) = c

If I have a spread*** and set cell A1 to 1, A2 to 1 and A3 to A1+A2
then A3 will display 2 .

If I then set A2 to -1 then A3 will display 0.
That's VERY basic algebra, which Tusseladd cannot manage.

==============================================

But this 0 is not = c as Paul indicated;
==============================================
So why did you agree with the moron? It's people like you that
spread confusion.
And don't call him "Paul", he's a Norwegian troll (tusseladd).
==============================================
it is the composite speed of two objects (including two rays of light)
approaching each other at c (negative closing speed). It means that if
two particles at 300000km/sec each try to collide, they never can
because their combined speed is zero, nada, zilch, nix.

Peter Riedt
===============================================
Absolute nonsense. I see cars coming toward me at -140 mph
every day and they are only travelling at -70 mph with respect to
the road.
The car directly in front of me that is doing 70 mph w.r.t. the road
isn't
getting any further from me, it is doing 0 mph relative to me.

How you can ever hope to understand Einstein's con when you
can't even manage to add numbers for an opening speed is astounding.-
Hide
quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Androcles et al, this is the end to the confusion: If two particles
are in direct collision say at a speed of 300000km/sec each, their
closing speed is 600000km/sec e.g. the distance between them shrinks
at that speed.

Peter Riedt
============================================
Right, Riedt.
Right, Galileo.
Right, Newton.

Wrong, Tusseladd.
Wrong, Einstein.
Wrong, Minkowski.

And it does happen if they ever make LHC work, so you can throw
special relativity in the trash can because theoretical physicists are
miserable failed mathematicians.
Here's another one:
http://www.ivorcatt.com/2804.htm

"
So the only information about electromagnetism contained in the
apparently sophisticated equations (9) and (10) is about the two
constants in electromagnetism: the fixed velocity c, and that E, H at
every point are in fixed proportion Z0. The remaining content of
Maxwell?s Equations is hogwash.
"

Thanks for the link. Funilly enough, this is what I suspected, however
I cannot prove it.

Is the world really so messed up?

==========================================
Dunno about the world, engineers work around the problems.
Are the academics so fucked up? Yes they are, always have been.
Galileo was threatened with excommunication (which then was
to be socially ostracised as well) for supporting Copernicus's
view of the sun being at the centre of the Universe, and by the
very same bigots as Jeery and Tusseladd. Human nature doesn't
change in a few hundred years.
The only academics that are not fooled are the mathematicians,
the rest are opinionated idiots. Academics persuade politicians
who hold the purse strings, but LHC and ISS were built by engineers
for academics. LHC is actually a white elephant but it kept the Swiss
and the French busy for a while. The engineers don't care as long as
they get paid, the politician's don't care as long as they are in charge
and go down in history and the academics don't care as long as they
can run their mouth with their heads up their arses persuading each
other how clever they are.
Those that can, do. Those that can't, teach.
Newton was a mathematician, Galileo was a mathematician, Kepler
was a mathematician. Einstein was a failure.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_many_angels_could_sit_on_a_needle








.

Quantcast