Editor of Physical Review A, Dr Gordon W.F. Drake does WRONG subtraction of 8th Class mathematics.
in [Relativity]
|
From: ajay on 8 Oct 2009 20:19 On Oct 8, 6:08 pm, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Oct 8, 1:30 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > > > > > > "ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > >news:fc4432d8-8213-41ac-8a5f-c3b23e987b75(a)b18g2000vbl.googlegroups.com.... > > > > On Oct 8, 7:38 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > >> "ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > > >>news:1a6b5bb8-0f2a-434a-ab5d-f0fbc41a117b(a)r36g2000vbn.googlegroups.com... > > > >> > On Oct 7, 10:23 pm, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > >> >> On Oct 7, 8:32 am, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> >> > > Listen, wackjob. A=1, so all of your "papers" contain the same > > >> >> > > mistake. > > >> >> > > Drake showed you that A=1, I showed you that A=1 through a > > >> >> > > different > > >> >> > > way.- Hide quoted text - > > > >> >> > > - Show quoted text - > > > >> >> > i) THE MAIN THEME HERE IS , Dr Gordon W.F. Drake has done 8th class > > >> >> > math wrong. > > > >> >> Listen, wackjob, dr. Drake has shown you that A=1. I have shown you > > >> >> through a different method that A=1. > > >> >> Einstein is right, all your papers are wrong. > > > >> > --------- > > >> > DONO > > > >> > See that I pasted HOW Dr Drake simply did 8th class math wrong in > > >> > previous post. > > >> > comment on it. > > > >> His math is fine. You just can't understand 8th class math.- Hide quoted > > >> text - > > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > > ----- > > > INERTIAL > > > > See my previous post. > > > I've seen enough of them > > > > Dr Drake has done 8th class math wrong. > > > No .. you just haven't understood it .. big difference > > > > Dr Gordon W.F. Drake: p...(a)aps.org, 001-631-591-4000 to clarify > > > I have no need to talk to him, the correspondence from him to you was very > > clear > > > > AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us > > > You should choose a new career .. Physics and writing are not for you.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > --------- > INERTIAL > > There is established rule in schools to teach students the subtraction > of algebraic equations. > (i) LHS is subtracted from LHS > (ii) RHS is subtracted from RHS > > Dr Gordon W.F. Drake, Editor Physical Review, American Physical > Society, New York > Has not followed this rule. > Now he is silent it will never prove him correct. > > Dr Gordon W.F. Drake, Editor Physical Review, American Physical > Society , New Yok: p...(a)aps.org, 001-631-591-4000, > Should explain why he did 8th class math wrong. > > Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - ------ If Iam wrong rell me. AJAY SHARMA wwww.AjayOnLine.us
From: bz on 8 Oct 2009 23:09 On 06 Oct 2009, "Inertial" <relatively(a)rest.com> wrote news:00554f5a$0 $26943$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com in sci.physics.relativity: Most of my comments are addressed to AJAY, rather than Inertial. >> Dr Drake and devised two equations hf* = Mc2 + hf/A and >> hf* =Mc2 + hf >> where h is Planck's constant , f* and f are frequencies , M is mass >> of hydrogen >> atom in ground state , c is speed of light. Then Dr Drake has >> subtracted equations as >> >> hf* = Mc2 + hf/A (1) >> hf* =Mc2 + hf (2) >> --------------------------- >> Difference = hf/A - hf = hf (1/A-1) He SHOULD have written this as DELTA hf* = hf (1/A-1) Where DELTA indicates 'change in', and is commonly so used in calculus. Your failure to understand this indicates the fact that you failed to understand that hf* sub 1 =/= hf* sub 2, so DELTA hf* is NOT zero. the hf* in equation (1) is NOT equal to the hf* in equation (2). Your failure to understand this is made clear when you said: >> >> Correct version is >> hf* = Mc2 + hf/A >> hf* = Mc2 + hf >> --------------------------- >> 0 = hf/A - hf = hf (1/A-1) or A =1 (4) You should study the importance of finite differences. They are fundamental to taking derivatives in calculus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite_difference. In Drake's case, the difference is NOT a small difference, as one would find in calculus, it is the difference between different energy states. One comment to Inertial: going ballistic and using terms that would not be used in polite society is rude (remember your grandchildren may someday read what you post now, or a prospective boss may read them) and does nothing to improve your credibility. I applaud your attempts to educate but deplore some of the things you have said in some of your articles. There is no excuse for some of the things that some people say here. -- bz please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an infinite set.
From: Dono. on 9 Oct 2009 00:49 On Oct 8, 7:43 pm, Robert Higgins <robert_higgins...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > YOU ARE WRONG. Among other things, you claim to observe the law of > conservation of momentum, but then you claim that the recoil of an > atom that emits a photon is very small. Precisely. The same thing that was shown here: http://www.conceptsofphysics.net/V_3/549.pdf
From: Sam Wormley on 9 Oct 2009 01:04 Dono. wrote: > On Oct 8, 7:43 pm, Robert Higgins <robert_higgins...(a)hotmail.com> > wrote: >> YOU ARE WRONG. Among other things, you claim to observe the law of >> conservation of momentum, but then you claim that the recoil of an >> atom that emits a photon is very small. > > Precisely. The same thing that was shown here: > > http://www.conceptsofphysics.net/V_3/549.pdf > > <smiling>
From: ajay on 9 Oct 2009 02:41
On Oct 9, 8:09 am, bz <bz+...(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote: > On 06 Oct 2009, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote news:00554f5a$0 > $26943$c3e8...(a)news.astraweb.com in sci.physics.relativity: > > Most of my comments are addressed to AJAY, rather than Inertial. > > >> Dr Drake and devised two equations hf* = Mc2 + hf/A and > >> hf* =Mc2 + hf > >> where h is Planck's constant , f* and f are frequencies , M is mass > >> of hydrogen > >> atom in ground state , c is speed of light. Then Dr Drake has > >> subtracted equations as > > >> hf* = Mc2 + hf/A (1) > >> hf* =Mc2 + hf (2) > >> --------------------------- > >> Difference = hf/A - hf = hf (1/A-1) > > He SHOULD have written this as > > DELTA hf* = hf (1/A-1) > Where DELTA indicates 'change in', and is commonly so used in calculus. > > Your failure to understand this indicates the fact that you failed to > understand that > hf* sub 1 =/= hf* sub 2, so DELTA hf* is NOT zero. > > the hf* in equation (1) is NOT equal to the hf* in equation (2). > > Your failure to understand this is made clear when you said: > > > > >> Correct version is > >> hf* = Mc2 + hf/A > >> hf* = Mc2 + hf > >> --------------------------- > >> 0 = hf/A - hf = hf (1/A-1) or A =1 (4) > > You should study the importance of finite differences. They are fundamental > to taking derivatives in calculus.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite_difference. > > In Drake's case, the difference is NOT a small difference, as one would > find in calculus, it is the difference between different energy states. > > One comment to Inertial: going ballistic and using terms that would not be > used in polite society is rude (remember your grandchildren may someday > read what you post now, or a prospective boss may read them) and does > nothing to improve your credibility. I applaud your attempts to educate but > deplore some of the things you have said in some of your articles. There is > no excuse for some of the things that some people say here. > > -- > bz > > please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an > infinite set. ------- ------ Addressed to BZ You gave written hf* = Mc2 + hf/A (1) hf* =Mc2 + hf (2) --------------------------- Difference = hf/A - hf = hf (1/A-1) He (Dr Drake )SHOULD have written this as DELTA hf* = hf (1/A-1) Where DELTA indicates 'change in', and is commonly so used in calculus. Will Dr Gordon W.F. Drake, Editor Physical Review, American Physical Society , New York: pra(a)aps.org, 001-631-591-4000, agree to this ? Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us ----- |