A simple Q. but not a simple A,,
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: float..my farts
Next: LHC Math gives a Doomsday.
From: cjcountess on 22 Jan 2010 08:53 On Jan 22, 7:24 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > "cjcountess" <cjcount...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > But I will state one more time > > > E=hf/c^2 is just as valid as E=m/c^2 > > Yes .. both just as invalid. The CORRECT formulas are > > E = hf > E = mc^2 > > NOT > > E = hf/c^2 > > And NOT > > E = m/c^2 > > You can't just make up random combinations of letters and call it a physics > formula > > > and is demonstrated in paper: > > Relativistic Effects on Clocks > > Aboard GPS Satellites > > Carl E. Mungan, U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis, MD > > Containing on "first page, third paragraph" > > > If the photon travels downward in Earths gravitational > > field, it therefore loses potential energy of (hf /c2 > > You just dishonestly cut out half of the formula, which in full is > (hf/c^2).deltaV > > Where deltaV is a change in gravitational potential. Really, you call that dishonest, ok E=(hf/c^2)deltaV, have your deltaV with itstill doesn't change what I said, you are just trying to dance around the issue This equation at end of statement, is clearly equivalent to E=hf/c^2 fromhttp://usna.edu/Users/physics/mungan/Publications/TPT11.pdf I'll just leave it like that and let the people judge for themselves Conrad J Countess
From: Inertial on 22 Jan 2010 18:04 "cjcountess" <cjcountess(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:499d4c2b-8945-49ea-b76f-c0ab51866511(a)a15g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... > On Jan 22, 7:24 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: >> "cjcountess" <cjcount...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message >> >> > But I will state one more time >> >> > E=hf/c^2 is just as valid as E=m/c^2 >> >> Yes .. both just as invalid. The CORRECT formulas are >> >> E = hf >> E = mc^2 >> >> NOT >> >> E = hf/c^2 >> >> And NOT >> >> E = m/c^2 >> >> You can't just make up random combinations of letters and call it a >> physics >> formula >> >> > and is demonstrated in paper: >> > Relativistic Effects on Clocks >> > Aboard GPS Satellites >> > Carl E. Mungan, U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis, MD >> > Containing on "first page, third paragraph" >> >> > If the photon travels downward in Earth�s gravitational >> > field, it therefore loses potential energy of (hf /c2 >> >> You just dishonestly cut out half of the formula, which in full is > > > >> (hf/c^2).deltaV >> >> Where deltaV is a change in gravitational potential. > > Really, you call that dishonest, Yes .. VERY > ok E=(hf/c^2)deltaV, have your deltaV > with itstill doesn't change what I said, yes .. it does. > you are just trying to dance > around the issue No .. that's what you are doing now that your dishonesty (or stupidity) is exposed > This equation at end of statement, is clearly equivalent to E=hf/c^2 No .. it is not. > fromhttp://usna.edu/Users/physics/mungan/Publications/TPT11.pdf > > I'll just leave it like that and let the people judge for themselves So you lie and run away. You're a coward.
From: glird on 22 Jan 2010 21:08 On Jan 22, 6:04 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > "cjcountess" <cjcount...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > you are just trying to dance around the issue > > No .. that's what you are doing now that your dishonesty (or > stupidity) is exposed > > > I'll just leave it like that and let the people judge for themselves > > So you lie and run away. You're a coward. Either one or the other regardless of choice three. (Even a coward can't lie AND run away.) Either way, would you guys PLEASE stop making fools of each other? glirD
From: Inertial on 22 Jan 2010 21:14 "glird" <glird(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:5f5d9aa8-c30d-4eca-8441-f8fa9d8e7f41(a)f12g2000yqn.googlegroups.com... > On Jan 22, 6:04 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: >> "cjcountess" <cjcount...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> > you are just trying to dance around the issue >> >> No .. that's what you are doing now that your dishonesty (or >> stupidity) is exposed >> >> > I'll just leave it like that and let the people judge for themselves >> >> So you lie and run away. You're a coward. > > Either one or the other regardless of choice three. > (Even a coward can't lie AND run away.) Of course he can. He tells a lie and then runs away. Or can even tell the lie AS he runs away. Or do you mean 'lie' as in 'be in a horizontal position' ??? > Either way, would you guys PLEASE stop making fools of each other? I haven't.
From: Inertial on 22 Jan 2010 21:28
"Inertial" <relatively(a)rest.com> wrote in message news:036a480e$0$1314$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > > "glird" <glird(a)aol.com> wrote in message > news:5f5d9aa8-c30d-4eca-8441-f8fa9d8e7f41(a)f12g2000yqn.googlegroups.com... >> On Jan 22, 6:04 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: >>> "cjcountess" <cjcount...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>> > you are just trying to dance around the issue >>> >>> No .. that's what you are doing now that your dishonesty (or >>> stupidity) is exposed >>> >>> > I'll just leave it like that and let the people judge for themselves >>> >>> So you lie and run away. You're a coward. >> >> Either one or the other regardless of choice three. >> (Even a coward can't lie AND run away.) > > Of course he can. He tells a lie and then runs away. Or can even tell > the lie AS he runs away. Or do you mean 'lie' as in 'be in a horizontal > position' ??? > >> Either way, would you guys PLEASE stop making fools of each other? > > I haven't. Well, haven't made a fool of myself. And countess has made enough of a fool of himself already .. I just pointed it out. |