3 ms·

> I have said exactly the same thing the entire time This is a lie -- you keep changing your claim to keep up with the facts other people provide you with. Exa

by lutusp 11y ago

> I have said exactly the same thing the entire time This is a lie -- you keep changing your claim to keep up with the facts other people provide you with. Examples below. > What I said, over and over, is you can not turn velocity into light directly, you have to transfer that velocity to something else. That's not what you said originally, and you are now lying. You said that "Kinetic energy does not become heat and light. Kinetic energy is velocity." Both statements are false (velocity is one of many examples of kinetic energy but the reverse claim is an error of omission), and I provided the literature references, which you refused to read. You earlier said: > Friction might cause objects to equalize in velocity, but can not actually reduce velocity (only share it amongst the objects). Totally false -- velocity is not conserved, energy is conserved. There's no conservation of velocity law. If you were a scientist, if you knew anything about physics and possessed intellectual integrity, you would drop a lump of clay, watch it abruptly stop at the floor as it efficiently converts velocity into heat. Or two billiard balls on a collision course, or two protons at the LHC, etc. etc.. > Clearly I'm not the teacher for you. "The teacher?" You're utterly ignorant and a narcissist to boot. You're severely mentally ill, unfortunately there's no cure for malignant narcissism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malignant_narcissism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malignant_narcissism). We're done -- you have to learn this on your own without embarrassing yourself further in this public forum. Have a nice day.

ars 11y ago
> velocity is not conserved, energy is conserved. There's no conservation of velocity law But there is, it's called Conservation of Momentum. It's velocity times mass. Go look it up - it will take just a few seconds on google. I'll wait. > you would drop a lump of clay, watch it abruptly stop at the floor as it efficiently converts velocity into heat No, it transferred its velocity to the entire planet. > Or two billiard balls on a collision course One has positive velocity, the other negative. They cancel out. But go try making two billiard balls stop when they are both going the same way (as in your example about particles near the event horizon). You can't. Try it - maybe it will help. You have to transfer the velocity to something else. > We're done -- you have to learn this on your own without embarrassing yourself further in this public forum. Have a nice day. Oh, we were done ages ago. One you do learn some physics you'll recall this conversion and cringe in embarrassment, not at your ignorance, but at your refusal to learn. Your attempt at "diagnosing me" doesn't perturb me, because I know this stuff backward and forwards. Your obstinacy just amuses me. This stuff is so basic your comments are just laughable.
- dllthomas 11y ago
  "One you do learn some physics you'll recall this conversion and cringe in embarrassment, not at your ignorance, but at your refusal to learn." Just FYI, your conversational partner's website says: "Paul Lutus has a wide background in science and technology. He designed spacecraft components for the NASA Space Shuttle and created a mathematical model of the solar system used by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory during the Viking Mars mission."
  - ars 11y ago
    That doesn't make any sense at all. How is it possible that someone with a "wide background in science" has not heard about conservation of momentum? Are you sure it's the same person?
    - dllthomas 11y ago
      Am I sure? I've done no verification. But while I'm occasionally frustrated with the holder of that account I've seen no particular reason to believe that they are not who they claim to be. I am sure that the account holder claims to be Paul Lutus, as the link is on his profile. 'How is it possible that someone with a "wide background in science" has not heard about conservation of momentum?' It's probably not; but this comment thread (wading through the jibes, snipes, and nonsense) doesn't seem to demonstrate with much clarity that he hasn't.

by lutusp 11y ago

ars 11y ago

> velocity is not conserved, energy is conserved. There's no conservation of velocity law But there is, it's called Conservation of Momentum. It's velocity times mass. Go look it up - it will take just a few seconds on google. I'll wait. > you would drop a lump of clay, watch it abruptly stop at the floor as it efficiently converts velocity into heat No, it transferred its velocity to the entire planet. > Or two billiard balls on a collision course One has positive velocity, the other negative. They cancel out. But go try making two billiard balls stop when they are both going the same way (as in your example about particles near the event horizon). You can't. Try it - maybe it will help. You have to transfer the velocity to something else. > We're done -- you have to learn this on your own without embarrassing yourself further in this public forum. Have a nice day. Oh, we were done ages ago. One you do learn some physics you'll recall this conversion and cringe in embarrassment, not at your ignorance, but at your refusal to learn. Your attempt at "diagnosing me" doesn't perturb me, because I know this stuff backward and forwards. Your obstinacy just amuses me. This stuff is so basic your comments are just laughable.

dllthomas 11y ago
"One you do learn some physics you'll recall this conversion and cringe in embarrassment, not at your ignorance, but at your refusal to learn." Just FYI, your conversational partner's website says: "Paul Lutus has a wide background in science and technology. He designed spacecraft components for the NASA Space Shuttle and created a mathematical model of the solar system used by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory during the Viking Mars mission."
- ars 11y ago
  That doesn't make any sense at all. How is it possible that someone with a "wide background in science" has not heard about conservation of momentum? Are you sure it's the same person?
  - dllthomas 11y ago
    Am I sure? I've done no verification. But while I'm occasionally frustrated with the holder of that account I've seen no particular reason to believe that they are not who they claim to be. I am sure that the account holder claims to be Paul Lutus, as the link is on his profile. 'How is it possible that someone with a "wide background in science" has not heard about conservation of momentum?' It's probably not; but this comment thread (wading through the jibes, snipes, and nonsense) doesn't seem to demonstrate with much clarity that he hasn't.