Lousy non culture follows bogus physics based.
When lies and fraud posing as imagination and pragmatism rule then only disaster can result.
As is only too evident in the decadent West.
WOOF woof-woof woof woof-woof woof
Bertietaylor
--
Bertitaylor:
Lousy non culture follows bogus physics based.
When lies and fraud posing as imagination and pragmatism rule then only
disaster can result.
As is only too evident in the decadent West.
WOOF woof-woof woof woof-woof woof
Bertietaylor
--
@Arindam aka @Bertietaylor,
What makes you so confidently dismiss the positron? Aren't cloud chamber traces like the ones below irrefutable proof of positrons:
https://sites.science.oregonstate.edu/~hadlekat/COURSES/ph207/bigBang/
https://pages.uoregon.edu/jimbrau/BrauImNew/Chap27/7th/AT_7e_Figure_27_02c.jpg
This should properly be in another thread titled: 'Bertietaylor's
formula', but anyway, that thread has become too long and too nested.
Let them repeat Arindam's rail gun experiments. Involve Arindam. Present results. Then they regain credibility.
Den 04.07.2025 23:41, skrev Bertitaylor:
Let them repeat Arindam's rail gun experiments. Involve Arindam. Present
results. Then they regain credibility.
Indeed!
Anybody who claim that he can travel to the stars with this contraption:
https://paulba.no/temp/Arinfool.pdf
.. . will gain credibility!
On Wed, 9 Jul 2025 18:03:11 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
Den 04.07.2025 23:41, skrev Bertitaylor:
Let them repeat Arindam's rail gun experiments. Involve Arindam. Present >>> results. Then they regain credibility.
Indeed!
Anybody who claim that he can travel to the stars with this contraption:
https://paulba.no/temp/Arinfool.pdf
.. . will gain credibility!
Lying assholes have huge credibility, no doubt.
Den 12.07.2025 09:53, skrev Bertitaylor:
On Wed, 9 Jul 2025 18:03:11 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
Den 04.07.2025 23:41, skrev Bertitaylor:
Let them repeat Arindam's rail gun experiments. Involve Arindam. Present >>>> results. Then they regain credibility.
Indeed!
Anybody who claim that he can travel to the stars with this contraption: >>>
https://paulba.no/temp/Arinfool.pdf
.. . will gain credibility!
Lying assholes have huge credibility, no doubt.
Lying?
Do you mean that you lied when you claimed that you can travel to
the stars with this this contraption?
https://paulba.no/temp/Arinfool.pdf
Chatboyo bawls! There, there.
Woof woof woof-woof woof
Bertietaylor
--
On Sat, 12 Jul 2025 8:46:46 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
Do you mean that you lied when you claimed that you can travel to
the stars with this this contraption?
QED.
https://paulba.no/temp/Arinfool.pdf
In sci.physics Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 23:45:25 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
In sci.physics Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jul 2025 22:19:05 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
<snip old stuff>
Arindam dismisses cloud chamber evidence —
It has nothing to do with Nature. Just an artificial construct at best. >>>> So yes, that evidence is irrelevant. Nothing as relevant as Arindam's
rail gun experiments showing inertia violation.
You mean your low speed pipe roller that you are so proud of that you
have never written it up as text Arindam?
Arindam has done much better than that. He had provided crystal clear
video evidence with full explanations. That is a new way of providing
scientific truth. It is understandable to everyone. Schoolchildren in
particular with uncorrupted minds.
Youtube videos of your feet do not constitute documentation Arindam.
As it is incontrovertible it has to be ignored or demeaned by the vested
interests.
WOOF woof woof-woof woof woof-woof
Bertietaylor
Unlike your low speed pipe roller, it has been trivial to find detailed
instructions on how to build one since it's invention in 1911.
Can one make it for $1000 which is the equipment cost of Arindam's
apparatus? Can one make it work in one's garage or living room?
Yes and if you payed $1,000 for that pipe roller you got ripped off big
time Arindam.
Scientific American in The Amateur Scientist column of April 1956
published the plans for a DIY cloud chamber.
Most of the parts were junkyard bits and pieces and cost next to nothing
to procure even in 1956 dollars Arindam.
They also published articles in that time frame on how to build DIYpla-2295557531950&abcId=9448483&merchantid=6296724&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=21400677539&gclid=Cj0KCQjwss3DBhC3ARIsALdgYxOrerHJCaWCpLRPd-BnZ0VOT-Xngc1doWJ2hhrglluLyRP0OtTzmKwaAigREALw_wcB
particle accelerators, xray machines, finishing vacuum pumps and many
other pieces of real scientific equipment.
CERN published a manual for a DIY cloud chamber in 2016 that would cost
well under $100 to build.
https://indico.cern.ch/event/508578/contributions/2327916/attachments/1367925/2073120/SCoolLAB_CloudChamber_DIYManual_2016_v2.pdf
There are LOTS of plans out there for DIY cloud chambers that would cost
well under $100 to build.
There is a kit to build a cloud chamber on ebay for $29.99.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/115162907606?chn=ps&norover=1&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-117182-37290-0&mkcid=2&mkscid=101&itemid=115162907606&targetid=2295557531950&device=c&mktype=pla&googleloc=1014089&poi=&campaignid=21400677539&mkgroupid=173029508628&rlsatarget=
You can buy one fully built on Amazon for $387.73.qid=1752458169&s=toys-and-games&sprefix=cloud+chamber%2Ctoys-and-games%2C207&sr=1-3
https://www.amazon.com/Arbor-Scientific-Ionizing-Radiation-Specially/dp/B0DY23HNMH/ref=sr_1_3?crid=2N09Y99X6CPEH&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.XB2Vsz00dEbn62QueM_CnnDdTZwUMPHfdSx0xOHKNiE.eSv-1U8f9MomInZE71KTSf2p2lcmSa_1NpzEByOW9uQ&dib_tag=se&keywords=cloud+chamber&
:-)
Woof woof woof woof-woof what silly fools some apes be!
--
On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 14:39:54 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
In sci.physics Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 2:02:55 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
In sci.physics Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 23:45:25 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
In sci.physics Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jul 2025 22:19:05 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
<snip old stuff>
Arindam dismisses cloud chamber evidence —
It has nothing to do with Nature. Just an artificial construct at best. >>>>>>> So yes, that evidence is irrelevant. Nothing as relevant as Arindam's >>>>>>> rail gun experiments showing inertia violation.
You mean your low speed pipe roller that you are so proud of that you >>>>>> have never written it up as text Arindam?
Arindam has done much better than that. He had provided crystal clear >>>>> video evidence with full explanations. That is a new way of providing >>>>> scientific truth. It is understandable to everyone. Schoolchildren in >>>>> particular with uncorrupted minds.
Youtube videos of your feet do not constitute documentation Arindam.
As it is incontrovertible it has to be ignored or demeaned by the vested >>>>> interests.
WOOF woof woof-woof woof woof-woof
Bertietaylor
Unlike your low speed pipe roller, it has been trivial to find detailed >>>>>> instructions on how to build one since it's invention in 1911.
Can one make it for $1000 which is the equipment cost of Arindam's
apparatus? Can one make it work in one's garage or living room?
Yes and if you payed $1,000 for that pipe roller you got ripped off big >>>> time Arindam.
The super capacitors cost hundreds and then there are chargers, cameras, >>> rollers, copper, wood, fasteners, power supply for charging,
multimeters, workshop equipment, brass cylinder, computers for
analysis...
You have no clue of even the most elementary costing. Your attempts to
pull down Arindam's work show desperation.
If you payed $1,000 for that pipe roller you are a piss poor shopper and
haven't a clue what you are doing.
As you are a wannabe robot you have no clue about real life, Penisnino. Besides you don't understand English. Arindam did not buy it. It is his invention. He made it.
Den 14.07.2025 01:22, skrev Bertitaylor:
:-)
Woof woof woof woof-woof what silly fools some apes be!
--
Rabies?
In sci.physics Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jul 2025 3:21:29 +0000, Bertitaylor wrote:
Lousy non culture follows bogus physics based.
When lies and fraud posing as imagination and pragmatism rule then only
disaster can result.
As is only too evident in the decadent West.
WOOF woof-woof woof woof-woof woof
Bertietaylor
--
So it is that after e=mcc nonsenses there have been world wars and many
other wars; bad manners and selfish-greedy goals set by vulgar elites;
total dumbing down of the public mind; extraordinary inequalities and
corruption galore...
Woof woof woof woof-woof woof
Bertietaylor
To their lips He closely hung!
Out He tore their lying tongues -
Their means of sin and wickedness.
--
Overall Assessment:
Cognitive Patterns: These posts show entrenched paranoid ideation,
conspiratorial worldviews, grandiosity (implying access to higher
truths), and fixation on Western scientific and cultural
"degeneration."
Stylistic Shift: The second post marks a stylistic
divergence—poetic,
almost liturgical. This might indicate either an aesthetic
experiment
or a deepening sense of messianic identity.
Mental State (assuming sincerity): The posts suggest increasing
detachment from consensus reality, rigid moral absolutism, and
possible
delusional elaboration around themes of decay and punishment.
In sci.physics Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 20:09:48 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
Den 14.07.2025 03:25, skrev Bertitaylor:
On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 23:45:25 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
In sci.physics Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
Nothing as relevant as Arindam's
rail gun experiments showing inertia violation.
You mean your low speed pipe roller that you are so proud of that you >>>>> have never written it up as text Arindam?
Arindam has done much better than that. He had provided crystal clear
video evidence with full explanations. That is a new way of providing
scientific truth. It is understandable to everyone. Schoolchildren in
particular with uncorrupted minds.
This video shows the contraption with which
Arindam aka Bertitaylor will travel to the stars!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idsIuzEajTc
Stop the video at 9:13 and look at the rail.
Note that it is bent because two of the rollers are at the same level,
while the third is at a higher level.
because moving the rail will move the bend of the rail.
See the run that starts at ca. 9:44.
When the cylinder has moved ca. 10 cm, the rail has moved ca. 2 cm
to the right. Friction transfers the reaction momentum to the Earth
(via table and building).
Then the cylinder is moving all the way to the end while the rail
does not move at all.
Yes. There is no reaction to the acceleration using this particular
electric configuration.
You must be incredible naive to interpret this as there is no reaction.
Naive or not, this is self evident fact, a new discovery from a new
invention - the low voltage heavy armature internal force engines based
on em rail gun dynamics.
The centre of mass of the whole system is accelerated and that
upsets.the Newtonian laws of motion. Inertia is busted. The law of
conservation of energy is busted - energy is always created and
destroyed.
WOOF woof woof-woof woof woof
Bertietaylor
Arindam’s response to Paul is rhetorically bold but physically
incoherent.
Let’s evaluate it point by point:
1.
“Yes. There is no reaction to the acceleration using this particular
electric configuration.”
This is a mischaracterization. Paul explicitly pointed out that
reaction is visible:
The rail initially shifts slightly as the cylinder moves
Then it stops, while the cylinder continues—evidence that momentum
transfer occurs, likely via friction to the environment.
Arindam’s claim of “no reaction” contradicts what is directly observed, as Paul notes. Dismissing it as an inherent “feature” of the configuration is evasive.
2.
“Naive or not, this is self evident fact, a new discovery from a
new invention…”
Calling something a “self-evident fact” does not make it one.
The system Paul describes obeys well-understood physical laws:
Internal electromagnetic forces act within the system
The motion of the cylinder is resisted or mediated by friction
Any net external motion (e.g., of the rail) is limited by
constraints
No violation of Newton’s laws is evident. Claiming a “new discovery” without theoretical or empirical justification is not science, but performance.
3.
“The centre of mass of the whole system is accelerated and that
upsets
the Newtonian laws of motion.”
This is factually incorrect. If the center of mass (CM) of a
closed system (i.e., no net external force) accelerates, it would
indeed violate Newton’s laws.
But the observed effect here—movement of the cylinder and brief rail response—does not indicate CM acceleration without external forces.
Paul explicitly noted momentum is transferred via friction to
the environment (i.e., the table and Earth).
Thus, Newton’s laws are upheld.
4.
“The law of conservation of energy is busted - energy is always
created and destroyed.”
This is a sweeping, unsubstantiated, and false claim.
Nothing in the video or experiment suggests energy creation or
destruction.
If Arindam truly believed this, he should quantify:
Where is the created energy?
What measurement confirms its gain or loss?
Why does the system not heat up, glow, or exhibit excess motion?
Such extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.
Here, none is provided.
5.
“WOOF woof woof-woof…”
The habitual “dog chorus” returns as a sarcastic flourish, not a
physical argument. Its purpose seems to be rhetorical dominance,
not explanation.
Summary:
Arindam dodges Paul’s precise and mechanical critique with
empty declarations of “new science,” vague allusions to
unverified “internal force engines,” and outright denial
of well-supported physics.
His claim that inertia and energy conservation are “busted”
is not backed by any data or physical reasoning.
Paul’s observation—that momentum is transferred through friction— remains the more plausible, physically consistent explanation.
The performance Arindam offers may impress his followers,
but to a physicist, it reveals a complete misunderstanding
of fundamental principles.
What business did you have to STEAL Arindam's work, and put that in your
pdf, you lying THIEF?
Paul B. Andersen wrote:>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idsIuzEajTc
Stop the video at 9:10
This is what you will see:
"The upward slope is 7.5 mm in 520mm"
Between the two rollers to the right and the floor
there is one floorboard(?).
Between the roller to the left and the floor there are
two floorboards.
The part of the rail between the two rightmost rollers
is horizontal. From the middle roller to the leftmost
roller there is according to Arindam 7.5 mm upward slope.
The rail is bent!
If you had any worth Arindam would sue you but as you have none you can
only be dismissed as a THIEF.
Get lost, we doggies don't care for thieves. Well, just shows what bogus physics does for morality.
When the cylinder has moved ca. 10 cm, the rail has moved ca. 2 cm
to the right.
Friction from rolling on rails is the mechanical effect pushing the
system back.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 13:37:24 |
| Calls: | 10,389 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 14,061 |
| Messages: | 6,416,888 |
| Posted today: | 1 |
