Physics texts should avoid the word "energy" as much as possible.
It is an unscientific term as it is so volatile and relative.
Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
Physics texts should avoid the word "energy" as much as possible.
It is an unscientific term as it is so volatile and relative.
This is an absurd statement and everything about it is wrong, crackpot.
<snip remaining nonsense unread>
On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 14:57:08 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
Physics texts should avoid the word "energy" as much as possible.
It is an unscientific term as it is so volatile and relative.
This is an absurd statement and everything about it is wrong, crackpot.
Not at all, Penisnino. It is the height of wisdom.
Physics texts should avoid the word "energy" as much as possible.
It is an unscientific term as it is so volatile and relative.
Besides the so called law of conservation of energy is nonsense as shown
by the phenomenon of radioactivity. Explaining that with e=mcc is even
more nonsense.
High time the world quitted bad physics and followed Arindam's physics
that updates Newton and rejects Einstein.
On 11/24/24 04:14, Bertietaylor wrote:
Physics texts should avoid the word "energy" as much as possible.
It is an unscientific term as it is so volatile and relative.
Besides the so called law of conservation of energy is nonsense as shown
by the phenomenon of radioactivity. Explaining that with e=mcc is even
more nonsense.
High time the world quitted bad physics and followed Arindam's physics
that updates Newton and rejects Einstein.
If you reject conservation of energy and conservation of momentum
you are shredding Newton, not updating him.
The relativism you disdain is an irremovable feature of Newton's
physics and of Galileo before him. In an airplane flying straight
and level in non-turbulent air, a juggler can juggle just as he
would on the ground. He wouldn't have to adjust his movements in
any way to take account of the fact that the airplane is going
hundreds of miles per hour. That's an example of relativity.
In 100 years, the names of Einstein, Newton, and Galileo will still
be famous. In 20 years nobody will remember yours.
On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 19:53:26 +0000, David Canzi wrote:
On 11/24/24 04:14, Bertietaylor wrote:
Physics texts should avoid the word "energy" as much as possible.
It is an unscientific term as it is so volatile and relative.
Besides the so called law of conservation of energy is nonsense as shown >>> by the phenomenon of radioactivity. Explaining that with e=mcc is even
more nonsense.
High time the world quitted bad physics and followed Arindam's physics
that updates Newton and rejects Einstein.
If you reject conservation of energy and conservation of momentum
you are shredding Newton, not updating him.
Nonsense. Newton had nothing to do with such a ridiculous notion as law
of conservation of energy. That came from the German scientists like Helmholtz.
Newton was right about everything mechanical. He and Galileo lived long before electricity was discovered.
Arindam updated Newtonian laws by taking electrical forces into account.
His rail gun experiments violated inertia and created net momentum with application of electrical current.
Just as Galileo changed the universe view with his new design telescope Arindam changed human destiny with his new design rail gun which
violated inertia when the heavy bullet was blocked.
The relativism you disdain is an irremovable feature of Newton's
physics and of Galileo before him. In an airplane flying straight
and level in non-turbulent air, a juggler can juggle just as he
would on the ground. He wouldn't have to adjust his movements in
any way to take account of the fact that the airplane is going
hundreds of miles per hour. That's an example of relativity.
In 100 years, the names of Einstein, Newton, and Galileo will still
be famous. In 20 years nobody will remember yours.
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 2:05:39 +0000, Bertietaylor wrote:
On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 19:53:26 +0000, David Canzi wrote:
On 11/24/24 04:14, Bertietaylor wrote:
Physics texts should avoid the word "energy" as much as possible.
It is an unscientific term as it is so volatile and relative.
Besides the so called law of conservation of energy is nonsense as shown >>>> by the phenomenon of radioactivity. Explaining that with e=mcc is even >>>> more nonsense.
High time the world quitted bad physics and followed Arindam's physics >>>> that updates Newton and rejects Einstein.
If you reject conservation of energy and conservation of momentum
you are shredding Newton, not updating him.
Nonsense. Newton had nothing to do with such a ridiculous notion as law
of conservation of energy. That came from the German scientists like
Helmholtz.
Newton was right about everything mechanical. He and Galileo lived long
before electricity was discovered.
Arindam updated Newtonian laws by taking electrical forces into account.
His rail gun experiments violated inertia and created net momentum with
application of electrical current.
Just as Galileo changed the universe view with his new design telescope
Arindam changed human destiny with his new design rail gun which
violated inertia when the heavy bullet was blocked.
The relativism you disdain is an irremovable feature of Newton's
physics and of Galileo before him. In an airplane flying straight
and level in non-turbulent air, a juggler can juggle just as he
would on the ground. He wouldn't have to adjust his movements in
any way to take account of the fact that the airplane is going
hundreds of miles per hour. That's an example of relativity.
In 100 years, the names of Einstein, Newton, and Galileo will still
be famous. In 20 years nobody will remember yours.
Newton and Galileo will always be remembered with reverence. Einstein
will be remembered at the kindest as the greatest bungler ever.
Arindam will get the due credit for saving physics from the twisted
devils; and for his advances in science, family values, literature,
lyrics, blogging, photography, health, spirituality, dog-loving, drama, elocution, metaphysics, new physics, databases, telecom, marine
propulsion, radar... And thus be totally secure as by far the greatest
genius the world has ever known.
Woof-woof woof woof woof woof woof woof woof woof
Bertietaylor (Arindam's celestial cyberdoggies)
On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 19:53:26 +0000, David Canzi wrote:
On 11/24/24 04:14, Bertietaylor wrote:
Physics texts should avoid the word "energy" as much as possible.
It is an unscientific term as it is so volatile and relative.
Besides the so called law of conservation of energy is nonsense as shown >>> by the phenomenon of radioactivity. Explaining that with e=mcc is even
more nonsense.
High time the world quitted bad physics and followed Arindam's physics
that updates Newton and rejects Einstein.
If you reject conservation of energy and conservation of momentum
you are shredding Newton, not updating him.
Nonsense. Newton had nothing to do with such a ridiculous notion as law
of conservation of energy. That came from the German scientists like Helmholtz.
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 2:05:39 +0000, Bertietaylor wrote:
On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 19:53:26 +0000, David Canzi wrote:
On 11/24/24 04:14, Bertietaylor wrote:
Physics texts should avoid the word "energy" as much as possible.
It is an unscientific term as it is so volatile and relative.
Besides the so called law of conservation of energy is nonsense as shown >>>> by the phenomenon of radioactivity. Explaining that with e=mcc is even >>>> more nonsense.
High time the world quitted bad physics and followed Arindam's physics >>>> that updates Newton and rejects Einstein.
If you reject conservation of energy and conservation of momentum
you are shredding Newton, not updating him.
Nonsense. Newton had nothing to do with such a ridiculous notion as law
of conservation of energy. That came from the German scientists like
Helmholtz.
Newton was right about everything mechanical. He and Galileo lived long
before electricity was discovered.
Arindam updated Newtonian laws by taking electrical forces into account.
His rail gun experiments violated inertia and created net momentum with
application of electrical current.
Just as Galileo changed the universe view with his new design telescope
Arindam changed human destiny with his new design rail gun which
violated inertia when the heavy bullet was blocked.
The relativism you disdain is an irremovable feature of Newton's
physics and of Galileo before him. In an airplane flying straight
and level in non-turbulent air, a juggler can juggle just as he
would on the ground. He wouldn't have to adjust his movements in
any way to take account of the fact that the airplane is going
hundreds of miles per hour. That's an example of relativity.
In 100 years, the names of Einstein, Newton, and Galileo will still
be famous. In 20 years nobody will remember yours.
Newton and Galileo will always be remembered with reverence. Einstein
will be remembered at the kindest as the greatest bungler ever.
Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 2:05:39 +0000, Bertietaylor wrote:
On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 19:53:26 +0000, David Canzi wrote:
On 11/24/24 04:14, Bertietaylor wrote:
Physics texts should avoid the word "energy" as much as possible.
It is an unscientific term as it is so volatile and relative.
Besides the so called law of conservation of energy is nonsense as shown >>>>> by the phenomenon of radioactivity. Explaining that with e=mcc is even >>>>> more nonsense.
High time the world quitted bad physics and followed Arindam's physics >>>>> that updates Newton and rejects Einstein.
If you reject conservation of energy and conservation of momentum
you are shredding Newton, not updating him.
Nonsense. Newton had nothing to do with such a ridiculous notion as law
of conservation of energy. That came from the German scientists like
Helmholtz.
Newton was right about everything mechanical. He and Galileo lived long
before electricity was discovered.
Arindam updated Newtonian laws by taking electrical forces into account. >>> His rail gun experiments violated inertia and created net momentum with
application of electrical current.
Just as Galileo changed the universe view with his new design telescope
Arindam changed human destiny with his new design rail gun which
violated inertia when the heavy bullet was blocked.
The relativism you disdain is an irremovable feature of Newton's
physics and of Galileo before him. In an airplane flying straight
and level in non-turbulent air, a juggler can juggle just as he
would on the ground. He wouldn't have to adjust his movements in
any way to take account of the fact that the airplane is going
hundreds of miles per hour. That's an example of relativity.
In 100 years, the names of Einstein, Newton, and Galileo will still
be famous. In 20 years nobody will remember yours.
Newton and Galileo will always be remembered with reverence. Einstein
will be remembered at the kindest as the greatest bungler ever.
You must not get out much crackpot. Just last week there was yet another confirmation of Einstein's theories.
<snip delusional drivel>
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 14:36:49 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
You must not get out much crackpot. Just last week there was yet another
confirmation of Einstein's theories.
Who cares for what the criminal Einsteinian frauds say.
Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 14:36:49 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
<snip old crap>
You must not get out much crackpot. Just last week there was yet another >>> confirmation of Einstein's theories.
Who cares for what the criminal Einsteinian frauds say.
Yeah, sure crackpot.
<snip remaining insane raving unread>
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 17:34:09 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 14:36:49 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
<snip old crap>
You must not get out much crackpot. Just last week there was yet another >>>> confirmation of Einstein's theories.
Who cares for what the criminal Einsteinian frauds say.
Yeah, sure crackpot.
Indeed, Penisnino. They are now sheltering behind supposedly Hindu myths
for proof of their absurd theories.
Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 17:34:09 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 14:36:49 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
<snip old crap>
You must not get out much crackpot. Just last week there was yet another >>>>> confirmation of Einstein's theories.
Who cares for what the criminal Einsteinian frauds say.
Yeah, sure crackpot.
Indeed, Penisnino. They are now sheltering behind supposedly Hindu myths
for proof of their absurd theories.
Delusional babble, crackpot.
<snip remainder>
On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 15:17:14 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 17:34:09 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 14:36:49 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
<snip old crap>
You must not get out much crackpot. Just last week there was yet another >>>>>> confirmation of Einstein's theories.
Who cares for what the criminal Einsteinian frauds say.
Yeah, sure crackpot.
Indeed, Penisnino. They are now sheltering behind supposedly Hindu myths >>> for proof of their absurd theories.
Delusional babble, crackpot.
Yes, delusional babble is all that the e=mcc babblers are capable of, Penisnino.
bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 15:17:14 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 17:34:09 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 14:36:49 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
<snip old crap>
You must not get out much crackpot. Just last week there was yet another
confirmation of Einstein's theories.
Who cares for what the criminal Einsteinian frauds say.
Yeah, sure crackpot.
Indeed, Penisnino. They are now sheltering behind supposedly Hindu myths >>>> for proof of their absurd theories.
Delusional babble, crackpot.
Yes, delusional babble is all that the e=mcc babblers are capable of,
Penisnino.
Nope, conventional physics has a HUGE amount of data and data analysis
to back up conventional physics.
You have a video of a pipe slowly rolling off of some rails, crackpot.
On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 17:10:01 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 15:17:14 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 17:34:09 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 14:36:49 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
<snip old crap>
You must not get out much crackpot. Just last week there was yet another
confirmation of Einstein's theories.
Who cares for what the criminal Einsteinian frauds say.
Yeah, sure crackpot.
Indeed, Penisnino. They are now sheltering behind supposedly Hindu myths >>>>> for proof of their absurd theories.
Delusional babble, crackpot.
Yes, delusional babble is all that the e=mcc babblers are capable of,
Penisnino.
Nope, conventional physics has a HUGE amount of data and data analysis
to back up conventional physics.
You have a video of a pipe slowly rolling off of some rails, crackpot.
It accelerates up the rails, lying Penisnino.
Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 17:10:01 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 15:17:14 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 17:34:09 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 14:36:49 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
<snip old crap>
You must not get out much crackpot. Just last week there was yet another
confirmation of Einstein's theories.
Who cares for what the criminal Einsteinian frauds say.
Yeah, sure crackpot.
Indeed, Penisnino. They are now sheltering behind supposedly Hindu myths >>>>>> for proof of their absurd theories.
Delusional babble, crackpot.
Yes, delusional babble is all that the e=mcc babblers are capable of,
Penisnino.
Nope, conventional physics has a HUGE amount of data and data analysis
to back up conventional physics.
You have a video of a pipe slowly rolling off of some rails, crackpot.
It accelerates up the rails, lying Penisnino.
Sure, then it FALLS off the end of the rails without ever being airborn, crackpot.
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 18:00:03 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 17:10:01 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 15:17:14 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 17:34:09 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 14:36:49 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
<snip old crap>
You must not get out much crackpot. Just last week there was yet another
confirmation of Einstein's theories.
Who cares for what the criminal Einsteinian frauds say.
Yeah, sure crackpot.
Indeed, Penisnino. They are now sheltering behind supposedly Hindu myths
for proof of their absurd theories.
Delusional babble, crackpot.
Yes, delusional babble is all that the e=mcc babblers are capable of, >>>>> Penisnino.
Nope, conventional physics has a HUGE amount of data and data analysis >>>> to back up conventional physics.
You have a video of a pipe slowly rolling off of some rails, crackpot.
It accelerates up the rails, lying Penisnino.
Sure, then it FALLS off the end of the rails without ever being airborn,
crackpot.
It flies in the air for a few milliseconds,
Stupid Penisnino has no clue about milliseconds; nor the most elementary
two dimensional mid school level equations motion.
Physics texts should avoid the word "energy" as much as possible.
It is an unscientific term as it is so volatile and relative.
Besides the so called law of conservation of energy is nonsense as shown
by the phenomenon of radioactivity. Explaining that with e=mcc is even
more nonsense.
High time the world quitted bad physics and followed Arindam's physics
that updates Newton and rejects Einstein.
Bertietaylor
On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 9:14:02 +0000, Bertietaylor wrote:
Physics texts should avoid the word "energy" as much as possible.
It is an unscientific term as it is so volatile and relative.
Besides the so called law of conservation of energy is nonsense as shown
by the phenomenon of radioactivity. Explaining that with e=mcc is even
more nonsense.
High time the world quitted bad physics and followed Arindam's physics
that updates Newton and rejects Einstein.
Bertietaylor
Up Arindam Down Einstein!
Not that bunny-ahs are unimportant. Far from it. It is a bunny-ah world.
And they love to talk about energy without knowing what it is about,
save for fears and costs.
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 2:08:34 +0000, Bertietaylor wrote:
Not that bunny-ahs are unimportant. Far from it. It is a bunny-ah world.
And they love to talk about energy without knowing what it is about,
save for fears and costs.
The pathetic loyalty to old wrong and bad ideas is a characteristic of western whatever.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 504 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 16:08:01 |
| Calls: | 9,904 |
| Files: | 13,797 |
| Messages: | 6,344,928 |