Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #580087 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2022-03-11 22:20 -0800 |
| Last post | 2022-03-13 14:21 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 97 — 12 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-11 22:20 -0800
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2022-03-12 19:44 +1100
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-12 03:48 -0800
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2022-03-13 10:07 +1100
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-12 16:10 -0800
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2022-03-13 16:51 +1100
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-12 22:05 -0800
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-13 13:29 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-13 06:48 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-13 13:29 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-03-12 11:37 +0100
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-12 15:06 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-12 10:13 -0800
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-12 19:34 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-12 11:55 -0800
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-12 20:13 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-12 12:48 -0800
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-12 21:06 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-12 14:52 -0800
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-13 00:13 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2022-03-12 20:59 -0500
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-12 20:35 -0800
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-13 12:34 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-03-12 12:07 -0800
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-03-12 22:55 +0100
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-12 22:12 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-03-12 23:46 +0100
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-12 14:55 -0800
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-12 14:58 -0800
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Vaugn Rhea <var@bfrlsr.ni> - 2022-03-12 23:12 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-13 00:14 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-12 20:41 -0800
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-13 12:35 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-13 06:29 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-13 13:33 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-13 06:49 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-13 14:01 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2022-03-13 16:58 +0100
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2022-03-13 09:26 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2022-03-13 21:17 +0100
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-13 20:51 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-13 20:57 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-03-13 14:09 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2022-03-13 22:44 +0100
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-13 16:15 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-14 00:06 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-13 21:15 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2022-03-14 02:55 -0400
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-14 00:31 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2022-03-14 10:45 +0100
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-14 10:48 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-03-14 08:57 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-14 09:39 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-14 17:05 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2022-03-14 14:43 -0400
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-03-14 22:22 +0100
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-03-14 14:26 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-15 00:51 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-14 22:13 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-15 10:36 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-03-13 11:17 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-03-14 22:55 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-03-15 01:08 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-03-15 11:12 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-03-16 09:03 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-16 10:16 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-16 17:30 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-03-16 10:58 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-16 11:46 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-16 19:18 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-16 13:03 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-03-16 13:54 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-16 14:21 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-16 21:37 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2022-03-16 23:16 +0100
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-16 22:27 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-16 16:37 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-03-16 18:34 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-16 21:58 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-03-17 06:27 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-17 11:12 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-03-17 11:44 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-17 17:22 -0700
Crank Richard Hertz admits he's an asshole "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2022-03-17 21:26 -0700
Re: Crank Richard Hertz admits he's an asshole Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-03-17 22:30 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-18 21:21 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-03-18 21:54 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-18 22:21 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-03-18 23:10 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-03-18 23:42 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-03-19 13:10 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-03-19 13:50 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-03-20 12:08 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-03-21 22:47 -0700
Crank Richard Hertz loves eating shit "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2022-03-16 22:04 -0700
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-16 20:59 +0000
Re: Bodkin physics: Watermelons in free fall and solar radiation nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-03-13 14:21 +0100
Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →
| From | Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-03-12 20:59 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <t0jj5t$iut$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #580140 |
On 3/12/2022 5:52 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: > If you was at any asian country, they would have you hanging by your balls for your disrespect. > I've always observed that Odd is one of the better natured posters here. Sometimes someone is dumb enough to get a short rant, but each time I've seen it, the person being replied to did deserve it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-03-12 20:35 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <9a29f6fc-474f-4a0f-86d4-e798c76d3fe0n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #580156 |
On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 10:59:28 PM UTC-3, Michael Moroney wrote: <snip> > I've always observed that Odd is one of the better natured posters here. > Sometimes someone is dumb enough to get a short rant, but each time I've > seen it, the person being replied to did deserve it. Shut up! Shut up! Shut the fuck up! Some gems of your BBF: An electron is a quantized disturbance in the electron field, according to Weinberg. Then of course you have to remind yourself what Weinberg says a field is, exactly. You'll be surprised maybe about how tight the connection is between what an electron is and what spacetime is. Nobody offered me a job in a state-sponsored woodworking shop. I had to buy or make my own tools, I had to build my own client list, I had to find my own wood suppliers. In the first few years of my business, I operated at a net loss while making those investments. Ken is as useful as a pile of 1954 Akron telephone books and as dumb as half a bale of cotton. That's fine. That's one aspect to life. It's called metabolism. Maybe with a little bit of homeostasis thrown in. There are other traits that are also considered essential, which any high school biology book will point out: 1. Organization (cell structure) 2. Response to stimuli 3. Growth 4. Adaptation 5. Reproduction not to mention 6. Homeostasis 7. Metabolism Tom Roberts intervined: You forgot the essence of life as we know it: replication. That's not at all the premise of the Hafele-Keating experiment. There is a nice book, copyrighted in 1993, that describes this experiment and what it showed, for the consumption of laypeople. It's written so that people like you won't guess badly based on dim memories and newspaper clippings. Pretty sure both Hafele and Keating were both experts and developers of the clocks used, too. Essen disagreed with them, but he did not have better credentials than they did about the clocks. You'll notice that there is no implicit inheritance of those qualities from the constituents. The mass of a sea of photons does not inherit from the mass of the individual photons. Likewise, the volume of an atom does not inherit from the volumes of the electron (which we do not know differs from zero) or from the baryons in the nucleus. Indeed, the volume of the atom arises from the interactions of the constituents, and in fact the same is true for any composite substance, which matter is. So the fact that quarks might be one-dimensional strings has no bearing on whether matter has three-dimensional volume, since what lends the volume is not the volume of the quarks but their interactions. Same for the interacting fermions inside the proton or comprising the atom. Some gems of the Supreme Thinker, and I didn't have to dig too much in the past. The asshole wrote half of the posts in the 69,816 threads stored here.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-03-13 12:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <t0kocd$1m2j$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #580158 |
Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote: > On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 10:59:28 PM UTC-3, Michael Moroney wrote: > > <snip> > >> I've always observed that Odd is one of the better natured posters here. >> Sometimes someone is dumb enough to get a short rant, but each time I've >> seen it, the person being replied to did deserve it. > > Shut up! Shut up! Shut the fuck up! Are you talking to your elder? > > Some gems of your BBF: > > An electron is a quantized disturbance in the electron field, according to Weinberg. > Then of course you have to remind yourself what Weinberg says a field is, exactly. > You'll be surprised maybe about how tight the connection is between what > an electron is and what spacetime is. > > > Nobody offered me a job in a state-sponsored woodworking shop. > I had to buy or make my own tools, I had to build my own client list, > I had to find my own wood suppliers. In the first few years of my > business, I operated at a net loss while making those investments. > > > Ken is as useful as a pile of 1954 Akron telephone > books and as dumb as half a bale of cotton. > > > > That's fine. That's one aspect to life. It's called metabolism. Maybe > with a little bit of homeostasis thrown in. > > There are other traits that are also considered essential, which any > high school biology book will point out: > 1. Organization (cell structure) > 2. Response to stimuli > 3. Growth > 4. Adaptation > 5. Reproduction > not to mention > 6. Homeostasis > 7. Metabolism > > Tom Roberts intervined: You forgot the essence of life as we know it: replication. > > > > > That's not at all the premise of the Hafele-Keating experiment. There is > a nice book, copyrighted in 1993, that describes this experiment and > what it showed, for the consumption of laypeople. It's written so that > people like you won't guess badly based on dim memories and newspaper > clippings. > > Pretty sure both Hafele and Keating were both experts and developers of > the clocks used, too. Essen disagreed with them, but he did not have > better credentials than they did about the clocks. > > > > > You'll notice that there is no implicit inheritance of those qualities > from the constituents. The mass of a sea of photons does not inherit > from the mass of the individual photons. Likewise, the volume of an atom > does not inherit from the volumes of the electron (which we do not know > differs from zero) or from the baryons in the nucleus. Indeed, the > volume of the atom arises from the interactions of the constituents, and > in fact the same is true for any composite substance, which matter is. > > So the fact that quarks might be one-dimensional strings has no bearing > on whether matter has three-dimensional volume, since what lends the > volume is not the volume of the quarks but their interactions. Same for > the interacting fermions inside the proton or comprising the atom. > > > > Some gems of the Supreme Thinker, and I didn't have to dig too much in the past. There is no supreme thinking in any of the above. There is familiarity with Weinberg wrote in a book I read, personal history about my own business, an opinion about Ken Seto, the high school biology definition of life, awareness of the history of a famous physics experiment, and an expression of the current physics view of what drives physical volume. These are BASIC things for someone interested in science. Do you think I should not know basics? Why? > > The asshole wrote half of the posts in the 69,816 threads stored here. Oh I doubt that. I’ve only been here since 2013 or so. This forum has been around since the 1990s, no? And more active back then. > > > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-03-12 12:07 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <622CFD69.2DE1@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #580114 |
Richard Hertz wrote: > > On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 12:06:58 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: > > Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I can't let this gem pass. It's a sample of the power of thought of > > > The Supreme Thinker and one of the rare posts where he uses his math: > > > > > > Can you spot the error(s)? > > > > > > ************************************************* > > > > > > Dec 2, 2014, 5:17:02 PM > > > > > > Almost all of the photonic flow down onto the surface of the earth is > > > due to the sun. The amount of energy delivered to the surface of the > > > earth is 1370 W/m^2 at the latitude where the sun is directly overhead. > > > (At different latitutes, it's less.) > > > > > > So let's take a watermelon, which has a cross-sectional area of about > > > 0.20 m^2, and we'll drop it from the third story (10 meters up) of a > > > city parking garage. The maximal amount of photonic energy it can absorb > > > from above is therefore 1370 W/m^2 * 0.2 m^2 = 275 W roughly, certainly > > > no more than 300 W. > > > > > > This is of course presuming that none of the > > > photonic energy is reflected and that all of it is absorbed, which isn't > > > true but assuming that anyway will give us a maximum limit. > > > It takes 1.4 seconds for a watermelon released from rest to fall to the > > > ground. During this time, it will absorb 275 W * 1.4 sec = 400 joules roughly. > > > > > > Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms, > > > we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate: > > > 400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2 > > > so > > > v = 9.4 m/s if ALL of the photonic energy is absorbed and converted into > > > kinetic energy rather than heat or anything else. > > > > > > But the watermelon is observed to have a speed of 9.8 m/s^2 * 1.4 sec = > > > 13.7 m/s, which can be measured with a light strobe, a camera, and a > > > meter stick mounted at ground level. > > > ************************************************* > > > ?? > > > > > Why does a crazy person mine a 7-year-old post, remove all the context, and > > apparently have no point? > > > > -- > > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > Because I didn't like that you abused of an 86 years old person with endless discussions for several years (Fischer), > seemingly enjoying in a sadistic way your superiority. > > And this behavior with this elder is not the only one. > > It seems that you are fond of this kind of behavior with very old people, but feel bad when they die (one year later, in this case). > > I find this attitude despicable. An explosion is an explosion A birth is a birth A bully is a bully. Oh come on, you're being unfair now...a bully is a bully. Maybe ...unconsciously he might be unaware of his bully mentality. Are you German ...Richard? Did you know Albert Einstein said the Germans have an ...aggressive mentality? Are you aware of your ...aggressive mentality???? -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-03-12 22:55 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1poq7kf.1fdx6ar1reka3lN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #580114 |
Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote: > Do you get my point now, Bodkin? FYI, nobody is getting your point. Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-03-12 22:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <t0j5sd$e7m$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #580134 |
J. J. Lodder <nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote: > Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Do you get my point now, Bodkin? > > FYI, nobody is getting your point. > > Jan > I get the feeling this kind of post by him is a huge “how DARE you!” which is rich given his liberal usage of a flamethrower. -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-03-12 23:46 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1poq9u2.ryww2kktpdyqN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #580136 |
Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> wrote: > J. J. Lodder <nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote: > > Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Do you get my point now, Bodkin? > > > > FYI, nobody is getting your point. > > > > Jan > > > > I get the feeling this kind of post by him is a huge "how DARE you!" which > is rich given his liberal usage of a flamethrower. Quite possible, but I get no idea from his postings just what he thinks he is thowing flame at, Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-03-12 14:55 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <83ae855d-e55a-473d-953d-1251ba0b6210n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #580138 |
On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 7:46:46 PM UTC-3, J. J. Lodder wrote: > Quite possible, but I get no idea from his postings > just what he thinks he is thowing flame at, My point is two-fold: Bodkin is an idiot ignorant pretender AND still mocks the elders here about what he dissagree on their understanding of physics. This situation is the one that doesn't make sense: an imbecile judging other's people knowledge?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-03-12 14:58 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <3c99cf09-1f7e-44f6-989a-65ce4bafe5b2n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #580141 |
And better for you, Bodkin, that nobody is paying attention to the incredible stupidity that you wrote and I C&P in my OP here. Are you really in a position to judge anything on physics? But but you are an imbecile, how could you be taken seriously?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Vaugn Rhea <var@bfrlsr.ni> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-03-12 23:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <t0j9c8$1mmm$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #580141 |
Richard Hertz wrote: > My point is two-fold: Bodkin is an idiot ignorant pretender AND still > mocks the elders here about what he dissagree on their understanding of > physics. > > This situation is the one that doesn't make sense: an imbecile judging > other's people knowledge? "And you will hear rumors of wars". Rumors. Tracking Down _FAKE_ News Media about The Ukraine WAR - THEY ARE LYING TO YOU! https://www.bitchute.com/video/OtObCXviQAei/ Nuke Hoax! https://www.bitchute.com/video/3NrkhZlxlAQg/ And here an ukrainian "refuge" asking the reporter about legalized weed and cannabis in UK. Apparently he knows nothing about the war. Sky news: Are you all right? https://www.brighteon.com/a4143150-9c5b-4f5b-adf0-4277ceb22103
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-03-13 00:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <t0jd0l$rcr$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #580141 |
Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote: > On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 7:46:46 PM UTC-3, J. J. Lodder wrote: > >> Quite possible, but I get no idea from his postings >> just what he thinks he is thowing flame at, > > My point is two-fold: Bodkin is an idiot ignorant pretender AND still > mocks the elders here about what he dissagree on their > understanding of physics. > > This situation is the one that doesn't make sense: an imbecile judging > other's people knowledge? > You said that I made an error of using weight as mass in the kinetic energy. Would you care to look again, sir elder? And after doing that, will someone with the wisdom of years be able to offer that he has made a mistake? -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-03-12 20:41 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b7064d2e-f322-4333-947e-893f4bf503a6n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #580148 |
On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 9:14:17 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: <snip> > You said that I made an error of using weight as mass in the kinetic > energy. Would you care to look again, sir elder? And after doing that, will > someone with the wisdom of years be able to offer that he has made a > mistake? You wrote: Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms, we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate: 400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2 Are you telling that your watermelon weight about 90 kilograms? Really? That's a hell of a watermelon.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-03-13 12:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <t0kodk$1m3m$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #580159 |
Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote: > On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 9:14:17 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: > > <snip> > >> You said that I made an error of using weight as mass in the kinetic >> energy. Would you care to look again, sir elder? And after doing that, will >> someone with the wisdom of years be able to offer that he has made a >> mistake? > > You wrote: > > Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms, > we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate: > 400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2 > > Are you telling that your watermelon weight about 90 kilograms? Really? > > That's a hell of a watermelon. 9 kg, not 90 kg. The weight of the melon in SI units is a bit less than 90 newtons. An apple weighs about 1 newton. A watermelon that weighs 90 apples is not unusual. You were going to apologize? > > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-03-13 06:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7b5a185b-9d4c-4765-9678-0d672651d3c1n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #580173 |
On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 9:35:03 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: > Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote: <snip> > > Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms, > > we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate: > > 400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2 > > > > Are you telling that your watermelon weight about 90 kilograms? Really? > > > > That's a hell of a watermelon. > 9 kg, not 90 kg. The weight of the melon in SI units is a bit less than 90 > newtons. An apple weighs about 1 newton. A watermelon that weighs 90 apples > is not unusual. > > You were going to apologize? Ignorant, trying to save face! The weight is still measured in KgF (Kilogram Force), which is W = m . g (mass measured in Kg, g is g!). KE (Joules) = 1/2 MASS (Kg) x VELOCITY² (m/s)² 1 Joule = 1 Kg m²/s² , NOT 1 N m²/s² Asshole, you used 9 Kg (mass), which has weight of 90 KgF or 90 N in the formula of KE. But still try to be right, because you are a cretin without shame!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-03-13 13:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <t0krr6$15gk$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #580179 |
Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 9:35:03 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: >> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote: > > <snip> > >>> Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms, >>> we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate: >>> 400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2 >>> >>> Are you telling that your watermelon weight about 90 kilograms? Really? >>> >>> That's a hell of a watermelon. >> 9 kg, not 90 kg. The weight of the melon in SI units is a bit less than 90 >> newtons. An apple weighs about 1 newton. A watermelon that weighs 90 apples >> is not unusual. >> >> You were going to apologize? > > Ignorant, trying to save face! > > The weight is still measured in KgF (Kilogram Force), which is W = m . g > (mass measured in Kg, g is g!). No, I was quoting a mass in kilograms. 9 kg is the mass of the watermelon. You going to apologize now? Or is that beneath you because of your age? Old people shouldn’t have to apologize? > > KE (Joules) = 1/2 MASS (Kg) x VELOCITY² (m/s)² > > 1 Joule = 1 Kg m²/s² , NOT 1 N m²/s² > > Asshole, you used 9 Kg (mass), which has weight of 90 KgF or 90 N in the formula of KE. I used 9kg (I.e. the mass) in the calculation of the KE. You going to apologize now? > > > But still try to be right, because you are a cretin without shame! > > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-03-13 06:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <69c0e985-f0e8-4071-9e6c-c61fd35c1492n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #580180 |
On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 10:33:29 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: > Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 9:35:03 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: > >> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > >>> Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms, > >>> we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate: > >>> 400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2 > >>> > >>> Are you telling that your watermelon weight about 90 kilograms? Really? > >>> > >>> That's a hell of a watermelon. > >> 9 kg, not 90 kg. The weight of the melon in SI units is a bit less than 90 > >> newtons. An apple weighs about 1 newton. A watermelon that weighs 90 apples > >> is not unusual. > >> > >> You were going to apologize? > > > > Ignorant, trying to save face! > > > > The weight is still measured in KgF (Kilogram Force), which is W = m . g > > (mass measured in Kg, g is g!). > No, I was quoting a mass in kilograms. 9 kg is the mass of the watermelon. > > You going to apologize now? Or is that beneath you because of your age? Old > people shouldn’t have to apologize? > > > > KE (Joules) = 1/2 MASS (Kg) x VELOCITY² (m/s)² > > > > 1 Joule = 1 Kg m²/s² , NOT 1 N m²/s² > > > > Asshole, you used 9 Kg (mass), which has weight of 90 KgF or 90 N in the formula of KE. > I used 9kg (I.e. the mass) in the calculation of the KE. You going to > apologize now? > > > > > > But still try to be right, because you are a cretin without shame! > > > > > -- > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables Cretin! A 90 KgF watermelon (90 N)? You have no shame!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-03-13 14:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <t0ktfo$1rhk$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #580183 |
Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 10:33:29 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: >> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 9:35:03 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: >>>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> <snip> >>> >>>>> Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms, >>>>> we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate: >>>>> 400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2 >>>>> >>>>> Are you telling that your watermelon weight about 90 kilograms? Really? >>>>> >>>>> That's a hell of a watermelon. >>>> 9 kg, not 90 kg. The weight of the melon in SI units is a bit less than 90 >>>> newtons. An apple weighs about 1 newton. A watermelon that weighs 90 apples >>>> is not unusual. >>>> >>>> You were going to apologize? >>> >>> Ignorant, trying to save face! >>> >>> The weight is still measured in KgF (Kilogram Force), which is W = m . g >>> (mass measured in Kg, g is g!). >> No, I was quoting a mass in kilograms. 9 kg is the mass of the watermelon. >> >> You going to apologize now? Or is that beneath you because of your age? Old >> people shouldn’t have to apologize? >>> >>> KE (Joules) = 1/2 MASS (Kg) x VELOCITY² (m/s)² >>> >>> 1 Joule = 1 Kg m²/s² , NOT 1 N m²/s² >>> >>> Asshole, you used 9 Kg (mass), which has weight of 90 KgF or 90 N in the formula of KE. >> I used 9kg (I.e. the mass) in the calculation of the KE. You going to >> apologize now? >>> >>> >>> But still try to be right, because you are a cretin without shame! >>> >>> >> -- >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > Cretin! A 90 KgF watermelon (90 N)? You have no shame! > > If you’re joking now, it’s overworked. If you’re not, it’s pathetic. Either way, you’re more willing to say something stupid than to apologize. What does that tell you? -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-03-13 16:58 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <t0l4ag$pbn$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #580184 |
Op 13-mrt.-2022 om 15:01 schreef Odd Bodkin: > Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 10:33:29 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: >>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 9:35:03 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> <snip> >>>> >>>>>> Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms, >>>>>> we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate: >>>>>> 400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2 >>>>>> >>>>>> Are you telling that your watermelon weight about 90 kilograms? Really? >>>>>> >>>>>> That's a hell of a watermelon. >>>>> 9 kg, not 90 kg. The weight of the melon in SI units is a bit less than 90 >>>>> newtons. An apple weighs about 1 newton. A watermelon that weighs 90 apples >>>>> is not unusual. >>>>> >>>>> You were going to apologize? >>>> >>>> Ignorant, trying to save face! >>>> >>>> The weight is still measured in KgF (Kilogram Force), which is W = m . g >>>> (mass measured in Kg, g is g!). >>> No, I was quoting a mass in kilograms. 9 kg is the mass of the watermelon. >>> >>> You going to apologize now? Or is that beneath you because of your age? Old >>> people shouldn’t have to apologize? >>>> >>>> KE (Joules) = 1/2 MASS (Kg) x VELOCITY² (m/s)² >>>> >>>> 1 Joule = 1 Kg m²/s² , NOT 1 N m²/s² >>>> >>>> Asshole, you used 9 Kg (mass), which has weight of 90 KgF or 90 N in the formula of KE. >>> I used 9kg (I.e. the mass) in the calculation of the KE. You going to >>> apologize now? >>>> >>>> >>>> But still try to be right, because you are a cretin without shame! >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables >> >> Cretin! A 90 KgF watermelon (90 N)? You have no shame! >> >> > > If you’re joking now, it’s overworked. If you’re not, it’s pathetic. Either > way, you’re more willing to say something stupid than to apologize. What > does that tell you? > Sounds exactly like Dono. And of course, like trump. Dirk Vdm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-03-13 09:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3c32782b-e03e-47e1-ade9-f0dff5711027n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #580188 |
On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 8:58:13 AM UTC-7, Dirk Van de moortel wrote: > Op 13-mrt.-2022 om 15:01 schreef Odd Bodkin: > > Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 10:33:29 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: > >>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 9:35:03 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: > >>>>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> <snip> > >>>> > >>>>>> Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms, > >>>>>> we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate: > >>>>>> 400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Are you telling that your watermelon weight about 90 kilograms? Really? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> That's a hell of a watermelon. > >>>>> 9 kg, not 90 kg. The weight of the melon in SI units is a bit less than 90 > >>>>> newtons. An apple weighs about 1 newton. A watermelon that weighs 90 apples > >>>>> is not unusual. > >>>>> > >>>>> You were going to apologize? > >>>> > >>>> Ignorant, trying to save face! > >>>> > >>>> The weight is still measured in KgF (Kilogram Force), which is W = m . g > >>>> (mass measured in Kg, g is g!). > >>> No, I was quoting a mass in kilograms. 9 kg is the mass of the watermelon. > >>> > >>> You going to apologize now? Or is that beneath you because of your age? Old > >>> people shouldn’t have to apologize? > >>>> > >>>> KE (Joules) = 1/2 MASS (Kg) x VELOCITY² (m/s)² > >>>> > >>>> 1 Joule = 1 Kg m²/s² , NOT 1 N m²/s² > >>>> > >>>> Asshole, you used 9 Kg (mass), which has weight of 90 KgF or 90 N in the formula of KE. > >>> I used 9kg (I.e. the mass) in the calculation of the KE. You going to > >>> apologize now? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> But still try to be right, because you are a cretin without shame! > >>>> > >>>> > >>> -- > >>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > >> > >> Cretin! A 90 KgF watermelon (90 N)? You have no shame! > >> > >> > > > > If you’re joking now, it’s overworked. If you’re not, it’s pathetic. Either > > way, you’re more willing to say something stupid than to apologize. What > > does that tell you? > > > Sounds exactly like Dono. > And of course, like trump. > > Dirk Vdm Drek, I see that you still have the hard-on.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-03-13 21:17 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <XjsXJ.376485$8b1.48935@fx01.ams4> |
| In reply to | #580184 |
Den 13.03.2022 15:01, skrev Odd Bodkin: > Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 10:33:29 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: >>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Asshole, you used 9 Kg (mass), which has weight of 90 KgF or 90 N in the formula of KE. >>> I used 9kg (I.e. the mass) in the calculation of the KE. You going to >>> apologize now? >> >> Cretin! A 90 KgF watermelon (90 N)? You have no shame! >> > > If you’re joking now, it’s overworked. If you’re not, it’s pathetic. Either > way, you’re more willing to say something stupid than to apologize. What > does that tell you? > He isn't joking. He actually believes that kilogram force, or kilopond (kp) is the same as Newton. But 1 kp = 9.80665 N (as you know) Richard Hertz, read this: https://www.sizes.com/units/kilopond.htm Richard Hertz will now claim that he was joking or trolling. He will NOT apologize. -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web