Re: Force from punch

On Jun 9, 8:40 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jun 7, 10:25 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On Jun 6, 7:55 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jun 5, 12:12 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jun 4, 9:29 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jun 3, 8:54 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Folks:  POWER is simply a quantity of FORCE that is available to be
delivered continuously.

Uh, no it's not. Power is carefully defined by the standards
organizations whose job it is to provide such definitions. Nice try at
making stuff up off the top of your head, though. Do you need a
reference to where you can look up the definition?

 However, such force may be utilized for any
amount of time.  You are utilizing, say, five horsepower whether your
lawnmower runs for five minutes or for five hours.  PD's definition is
just dog diddly right off the top of his head.  — NoEinstein —- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dear PD:  Science is in its huge mess, because errors get made, and
such are then taught and taught.  Effectively, you are the defender of
the status quo... including all of the errors made by the dunces.  —
NoEinstein —-

A couple of comments:
1. I have no idea what "huge mess" you think physics is in.
2. You've yet to demonstrate where errors have been made, though
you've made some ill-informed claims about supposed errors. You've yet
to back up any of these claims. Watching you make assertions without
back-up is a little like watching you eat beef jerky without your
dentures in: it's sloppy, ineffective, and pretty ugly.
3. Whatever errors you claim have been made, you use physics terms in
a way that is counter to the way they are defined. This is something
akin to saying that the inventors of the English language made a bunch
of errors and are defenders of the status quo, and so words should
mean what you want them to mean, rather than what they the do mean.

PD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dear Folks:  PD is clueless to the possibility that the status quo can
be, and often is, wrong.

And you are betting the credibility of your statements on the
possibility that the status quo might be wrong. This is akin to saying
that Tommy the Dunce says 2+3=8 and his math teachers says it is
wrong, but his teacher was wrong about something else last month, this
means that 2+3=8 is correct.

Here's the question, NoEinstein. Scientists have a way of checking the
validity of their statements and ideas. Do you know what that way is?
Hint: it is NOT by their saying something contrary to what someone
else has said, and banking that the someone else is wrong.

By what means do you test the truth of what you claim?

 Instead he keeps wanting to apply errant
standards to judge new science truths.  What, if anything, has PD ever
done that has actually made a positive contribution to science?  —
NoEinstein —

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Force from punch
    ... of errors and are defenders of the status quo, ... This is akin to saying ... Here's the question, NoEinstein. ... standards to judge new science truths. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Force from punch
    ... Watching you make assertions without ... Whatever errors you claim have been made, you use physics terms in ... of errors and are defenders of the status quo, ... standards to judge new science truths. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: unsubscribe
    ... Brian were right on target. ... What are you saying with that gif. ... Herd mentality defends the status quo long past the time when the quo has lost its status. ...
    (alt.support.stop-smoking)