Editor of Physical Review A, Dr Gordon W.F. Drake does WRONG subtraction of 8th Class mathematics.
in [Relativity]
|
From: Dono. on 13 Oct 2009 22:46 On Oct 13, 7:19 pm, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Oct 13, 11:11 pm, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > On Oct 13, 9:06 am, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Oct 13, 7:16 am, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > On Oct 12, 6:59 pm, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Oct 12, 8:31 pm, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Oct 12, 8:12 am, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > DONO > > > > > > > Conceptual meaning of A > > > > > > > > In DE = Ac2Dm, 'A' is coefficient of proportionality, and its value > > > > > > > depends upon experimental and inherent conditions of the process. > > > > > > > ...but you demonstrated in every post that A=1. Congratulations for > > > > > > proving your papers wrong all by yourself! > > > > > > ------- > > > > > > To > > > > > Dono > > > > > > No I did not demonstrate. > > > > > A=1 can from set of equations given by Dr Drake, who did mistake of > > > > > student of 8th class. > > > > > The vale of A can be less, more or equal to one. > > > > > > Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us > > > > > Nope, A is ALWAYS equal to 1. > > > > > E^2-(p*c)^2=(m_0*c^2)^2 (1) > > > > > According to experimen, E=Mc^2. According to you: E=A*(Mc^2). So: > > > > > (Mc^2)^2-(p*c)^2=(m_0*c^2)^2 (2) > > > > > (A*Mc^2)^2-(p*c)^2=(m_0*c^2)^2 (3) > > > > ------------------------------------- > > > > > (A-1)^2*(Mc^2)^2=0 (4) > > > > > so A=1.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > -------- > > > > To > > > DONO > > > One answer is, as much as you can understand is below > > > > We have > > > > E^2 = m^2c^4 +p^2c^2 (1) > > > Now quoting your post > > > > M^2c^4 p^2c^2 = m^2c^4 (2) > > > A^2 M^2c^4 p^2c^2 = m^2c^4 (3) > > > - + - > > > -------------------------------------- > > > M^2c^4 (1-A^2) =0 > > > A^2 =1 > > > A = ± 1 (4) > > > Thus values of A other than one are possible. > > > > Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us > > > A=-1 would mean negative energy. How stooopid are you? > > A=1 is the ONLY possibility.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > ------- > > To > Dono > > Have you any idea of Dirac's theory , when positron was predicted. > > AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us The positron has no connection with the idiocies you are spouting.
From: doug on 14 Oct 2009 00:48 ajay wrote: > On Oct 13, 11:11 pm, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > >>On Oct 13, 9:06 am, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>On Oct 13, 7:16 am, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: >> >>>>On Oct 12, 6:59 pm, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>On Oct 12, 8:31 pm, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: >> >>>>>>On Oct 12, 8:12 am, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>> DONO >>>>>>>Conceptual meaning of A >> >>>>>>>In DE = Ac2Dm, 'A' is coefficient of proportionality, and its value >>>>>>>depends upon experimental and inherent conditions of the process. >> >>>>>>...but you demonstrated in every post that A=1. Congratulations for >>>>>>proving your papers wrong all by yourself! >> >>>>>------- >> >>>>>To >>>>>Dono >> >>>>>No I did not demonstrate. >>>>>A=1 can from set of equations given by Dr Drake, who did mistake of >>>>>student of 8th class. >>>>>The vale of A can be less, more or equal to one. >> >>>>>Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us >> >>>>Nope, A is ALWAYS equal to 1. >> >>>>E^2-(p*c)^2=(m_0*c^2)^2 (1) >> >>>>According to experimen, E=Mc^2. According to you: E=A*(Mc^2). So: >> >>>>(Mc^2)^2-(p*c)^2=(m_0*c^2)^2 (2) >> >>>>(A*Mc^2)^2-(p*c)^2=(m_0*c^2)^2 (3) >>>>------------------------------------- >> >>>>(A-1)^2*(Mc^2)^2=0 (4) >> >>>>so A=1.- Hide quoted text - >> >>>>- Show quoted text - >> >>>-------- >> >>>To >>> DONO >>>One answer is, as much as you can understand is below >> >>>We have >> >>>E^2 = m^2c^4 +p^2c^2 (1) >>>Now quoting your post >> >>>M^2c^4 �p^2c^2 = m^2c^4 (2) >>>A^2 M^2c^4 �p^2c^2 = m^2c^4 (3) >>>- + - >>>-------------------------------------- >>>M^2c^4 (1-A^2) =0 >>>A^2 =1 >>>A = � 1 (4) >>>Thus values of A other than one are possible. >> >>>Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us >> >>A=-1 would mean negative energy. How stooopid are you? >>A=1 is the ONLY possibility.- Hide quoted text - >> >>- Show quoted text - > > > ------- > > To > Dono > > Have you any idea of Dirac's theory , when positron was predicted. > > > AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us All we see is you whining and complaining. You have not shown any problems with the criticisms of your work. Why are you trying to look even more stupid by extending this tantrum?
From: ajay on 14 Oct 2009 02:12 On Oct 14, 9:48 am, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: > ajay wrote: > > On Oct 13, 11:11 pm, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > >>On Oct 13, 9:06 am, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>On Oct 13, 7:16 am, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > >>>>On Oct 12, 6:59 pm, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>>On Oct 12, 8:31 pm, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > >>>>>>On Oct 12, 8:12 am, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>>>>  DONO > >>>>>>>Conceptual meaning of A > > >>>>>>>In DE = Ac2Dm, 'A' is coefficient of proportionality, and its value > >>>>>>>depends upon experimental and inherent conditions of the process. > > >>>>>>...but you demonstrated in every post that A=1. Congratulations for > >>>>>>proving your papers wrong all by yourself! > > >>>>>------- > > >>>>>To > >>>>>Dono > > >>>>>No I did not demonstrate. > >>>>>A=1 can from set of equations given by Dr Drake, who did mistake of > >>>>>student of 8th class. > >>>>>The vale of A can be less, more or equal to one. > > >>>>>Ajay Sharma         www.AjayOnLine.us > > >>>>Nope, A is ALWAYS equal to 1. > > >>>>E^2-(p*c)^2=(m_0*c^2)^2  (1) > > >>>>According to experimen, E=Mc^2. According to you: E=A*(Mc^2). So: > > >>>>(Mc^2)^2-(p*c)^2=(m_0*c^2)^2   (2) > > >>>>(A*Mc^2)^2-(p*c)^2=(m_0*c^2)^2  (3) > >>>>------------------------------------- > > >>>>(A-1)^2*(Mc^2)^2=0         (4) > > >>>>so A=1.- Hide quoted text - > > >>>>- Show quoted text - > > >>>-------- > > >>>To > >>>   DONO > >>>One answer is, as much as you can understand is below > > >>>We have > > >>>E^2 = m^2c^4 +p^2c^2              (1) > >>>Now quoting your post > > >>>M^2c^4 âp^2c^2 = m^2c^4          (2) > >>>A^2 M^2c^4 âp^2c^2 = m^2c^4      (3) > >>>-            +         - > >>>-------------------------------------- > >>>M^2c^4 (1-A^2) =0 > >>>A^2 =1 > >>>A = ± 1                           (4) > >>>Thus values of A other than one are possible. > > >>>Ajay Sharma       www.AjayOnLine.us > > >>A=-1 would mean negative energy. How stooopid are you? > >>A=1 is the ONLY possibility.- Hide quoted text - > > >>- Show quoted text - > > > ------- > > > To > >  Dono > > > Have you any idea of Dirac's theory , when positron was predicted. > > > AJAY SHARMA            www.AjayOnLine.us > > All we see is you whining and complaining. You have not shown any > problems with the criticisms of your work.  Why are you trying to > look even more stupid by extending this tantrum?- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - ------ To Doug The theme of discussion is that Einstein's Sep 1905 derivation is incomplete. If we complete the derivation then INCONSISTENT RESULTS are obtained. The E=mc2 must be derived by new method. New eqaution is (delta) E =Ac2 (delta)m The reference to Einstein's paper is A. Einstein, Annalen. der Physik 17, 891-921 (1905). http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/ My submission is it true under special conditions. This equation is derived by Einstein in his Sep 1905 derivation under SPECIAL CONDITIONS. These are ( see paper) (a) Luminous body under consideration emits only TWO waves. (b) Luminous body emits two waves of EQAUL magnitudes. (c) Two waves are emitted by body in exactly opposite directions (ï¦ = 0 and ï¦ =180). (d) Einstein has taken velocity in classical region (v<<c and applied binomial theorem). It is not true under GENERAL CONDITIONS. Which are By General Conditions we mean (A) The body emits LARGE NUMBER of light waves. (B) The waves emitted are of DIFFERENT MAGNITUDES. (C) Body emits waves at DIFFERENT ANGLES. (E)Light emitting body may be at rest. All these cases are neglected by Einstein More information of peer review published papers. at www.AjayOnLine.us AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us
From: ajay on 14 Oct 2009 02:26 On Oct 14, 7:46 am, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > On Oct 13, 7:19 pm, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Oct 13, 11:11 pm, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > > > On Oct 13, 9:06 am, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Oct 13, 7:16 am, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > > On Oct 12, 6:59 pm, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Oct 12, 8:31 pm, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Oct 12, 8:12 am, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > DONO > > > > > > > > Conceptual meaning of A > > > > > > > > > In DE = Ac2Dm, 'A' is coefficient of proportionality, and its value > > > > > > > > depends upon experimental and inherent conditions of the process. > > > > > > > > ...but you demonstrated in every post that A=1. Congratulations for > > > > > > > proving your papers wrong all by yourself! > > > > > > > ------- > > > > > > > To > > > > > > Dono > > > > > > > No I did not demonstrate. > > > > > > A=1 can from set of equations given by Dr Drake, who did mistake of > > > > > > student of 8th class. > > > > > > The vale of A can be less, more or equal to one. > > > > > > > Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us > > > > > > Nope, A is ALWAYS equal to 1. > > > > > > E^2-(p*c)^2=(m_0*c^2)^2 (1) > > > > > > According to experimen, E=Mc^2. According to you: E=A*(Mc^2). So: > > > > > > (Mc^2)^2-(p*c)^2=(m_0*c^2)^2 (2) > > > > > > (A*Mc^2)^2-(p*c)^2=(m_0*c^2)^2 (3) > > > > > ------------------------------------- > > > > > > (A-1)^2*(Mc^2)^2=0 (4) > > > > > > so A=1.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > -------- > > > > > To > > > > DONO > > > > One answer is, as much as you can understand is below > > > > > We have > > > > > E^2 = m^2c^4 +p^2c^2 (1) > > > > Now quoting your post > > > > > M^2c^4 p^2c^2 = m^2c^4 (2) > > > > A^2 M^2c^4 p^2c^2 = m^2c^4 (3) > > > > - + - > > > > -------------------------------------- > > > > M^2c^4 (1-A^2) =0 > > > > A^2 =1 > > > > A = ± 1 (4) > > > > Thus values of A other than one are possible. > > > > > Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us > > > > A=-1 would mean negative energy. How stooopid are you? > > > A=1 is the ONLY possibility.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > ------- > > > To > > Dono > > > Have you any idea of Dirac's theory , when positron was predicted. > > > AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us > > The positron has no connection with the idiocies you are spouting.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -------- To Dono See how positron was predicted? The equation in consideration is E^2 = m^2c^4 +p^2c^2 There are two states of energy, +ve or -ve. Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us
From: doug on 14 Oct 2009 10:31
ajay wrote: > On Oct 14, 9:48 am, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: > >>ajay wrote: >> >>>On Oct 13, 11:11 pm, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: >> >>>>On Oct 13, 9:06 am, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>On Oct 13, 7:16 am, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: >> >>>>>>On Oct 12, 6:59 pm, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>On Oct 12, 8:31 pm, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>On Oct 12, 8:12 am, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>> DONO >>>>>>>>>Conceptual meaning of A >> >>>>>>>>>In DE = Ac2Dm, 'A' is coefficient of proportionality, and its value >>>>>>>>>depends upon experimental and inherent conditions of the process. >> >>>>>>>>...but you demonstrated in every post that A=1. Congratulations for >>>>>>>>proving your papers wrong all by yourself! >> >>>>>>>------- >> >>>>>>>To >>>>>>>Dono >> >>>>>>>No I did not demonstrate. >>>>>>>A=1 can from set of equations given by Dr Drake, who did mistake of >>>>>>>student of 8th class. >>>>>>>The vale of A can be less, more or equal to one. >> >>>>>>>Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us >> >>>>>>Nope, A is ALWAYS equal to 1. >> >>>>>>E^2-(p*c)^2=(m_0*c^2)^2 (1) >> >>>>>>According to experimen, E=Mc^2. According to you: E=A*(Mc^2). So: >> >>>>>>(Mc^2)^2-(p*c)^2=(m_0*c^2)^2 (2) >> >>>>>>(A*Mc^2)^2-(p*c)^2=(m_0*c^2)^2 (3) >>>>>>------------------------------------- >> >>>>>>(A-1)^2*(Mc^2)^2=0 (4) >> >>>>>>so A=1.- Hide quoted text - >> >>>>>>- Show quoted text - >> >>>>>-------- >> >>>>>To >>>>> DONO >>>>>One answer is, as much as you can understand is below >> >>>>>We have >> >>>>>E^2 = m^2c^4 +p^2c^2 (1) >>>>>Now quoting your post >> >>>>>M^2c^4 –p^2c^2 = m^2c^4 (2) >>>>>A^2 M^2c^4 –p^2c^2 = m^2c^4 (3) >>>>>- + - >>>>>-------------------------------------- >>>>>M^2c^4 (1-A^2) =0 >>>>>A^2 =1 >>>>>A = ± 1 (4) >>>>>Thus values of A other than one are possible. >> >>>>>Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us >> >>>>A=-1 would mean negative energy. How stooopid are you? >>>>A=1 is the ONLY possibility.- Hide quoted text - >> >>>>- Show quoted text - >> >>>------- >> >>>To >>> Dono >> >>>Have you any idea of Dirac's theory , when positron was predicted. >> >>>AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us >> >>All we see is you whining and complaining. You have not shown any >>problems with the criticisms of your work. Why are you trying to >>look even more stupid by extending this tantrum?- Hide quoted text - >> >>- Show quoted text - > > > ------ > > To > Doug > > The theme of discussion is that Einstein's Sep 1905 derivation is > incomplete. > If we complete the derivation then INCONSISTENT RESULTS are obtained. > The E=mc2 must be derived by new method. New eqaution is > (delta) E =Ac2 (delta)m > > The reference to Einstein's paper is > > A. Einstein, Annalen. der Physik 17, 891-921 (1905). > > http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/ > > My submission is it true under special conditions. > > This equation is derived by Einstein in his Sep 1905 derivation under > SPECIAL CONDITIONS. These are ( see paper) > > (a) Luminous body under consideration emits only TWO waves. > (b) Luminous body emits two waves of EQAUL magnitudes. > (c) Two waves are emitted by body in exactly opposite directions ( = > 0 and =180). > (d) Einstein has taken velocity in classical region (v<<c and applied > binomial theorem). > > It is not true under GENERAL CONDITIONS. Which are > By General Conditions we mean > > (A) The body emits LARGE NUMBER of light waves. > (B) The waves emitted are of DIFFERENT MAGNITUDES. > (C) Body emits waves at DIFFERENT ANGLES. > > (E)Light emitting body may be at rest. > All these cases are neglected by Einstein > More information of peer review published papers. > at www.AjayOnLine.us > > AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us So, this is why you are wasting your time. You are aware that there has been a lot of work done in the last century. Relativity is not dependent on the examples that Einstein used. Pick up a current text book and you will see that the basis is very different. > |