Editor of Physical Review A, Dr Gordon W.F. Drake does WRONG subtraction of 8th Class mathematics.
in [Logic]
|
Prev: New essay on Goedel's Incompleteness Theorem
Next: Solutions manual to Entrepreneurship 1e Bygrave Zacharakis
From: ajay on 26 Oct 2009 08:14 On Oct 26, 9:29 am, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: > ajay wrote: > > On Oct 26, 4:22 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > >>"ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > >>news:26e25ae3-b3c7-48f4-9ded-79ac2088f30e(a)33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com.... > > >>>On Oct 25, 7:15 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > >>>>"ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > >>>>news:24042f47-0c84-480c-9ff5-456fe39c6372(a)l31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com... > > >>>>>On Oct 25, 4:28 am, tomy tomy <tomytomy...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>>>On Oct 24, 6:07 pm, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>>>>On Oct 24, 5:13 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>"ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > >>>>>>>>news:ef4961ff-3ab3-4d03-8f67-21efd534376e(a)33g2000vbe.googlegroups..com... > > >>>>>>>>>On Oct 23, 8:04 pm, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>ajay wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>On Oct 23, 8:36 am, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>ajay wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>> -------- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>To > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>Inertial > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>How I can believe you , when did not form correct eqaution > >>>>>>>>>>>>>for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>pharse > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>''The high frequency photon is now passed through a machine > >>>>>>>>>>>>>that converts it back into a hydrogen atom in its ground > >>>>>>>>>>>>>state with mass M plus a low-frequency photon of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>frequency f '' > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>There are three energies here , but you say 4. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>there is no left over energy as you have claimed. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us > > >>>>>>>>>>>>Do you have any clue how silly you look with your constant > >>>>>>>>>>>>whining? Drake explained your mistake. You cannot understand > >>>>>>>>>>>>it. That is not his problem, it is yours. Get over it.- Hide > >>>>>>>>>>>>quoted > >>>>>>>>>>>>text - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text - > > >>>>>>>>>>>--------- > >>>>>>>>>>>To > >>>>>>>>>>> Doug > > >>>>>>>>>>>Drake has simply shown his limitations in understanding of > >>>>>>>>>>>LAW > >>>>>>>>>>>OF > >>>>>>>>>>>CONSERVATION OF ENERGY. > > >>>>>>>>>>No, he was explaining to you why you do not conserve energy. > >>>>>>>>>>You having tantrums here does not help your credibility here > >>>>>>>>>>which is at zero. > > >>>>>>>>>>>Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us-Hidequotedtext- > > >>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > >>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text - > > >>>>>>>>>------------- > >>>>>>>>>To > >>>>>>>>> Doug > > >>>>>>>>>Under what conditions energy is conseved? > > >>>>>>>>You mean you don't know? And you're submitting papers? Your > >>>>>>>>theory > >>>>>>>>(that A > >>>>>>>>is not always 1) results in energy not being conserved where it > >>>>>>>>should be. > >>>>>>>>Your theory breaks conservation laws. Your theory is refuted.- > >>>>>>>>Hide > >>>>>>>>quoted text - > > >>>>>>>>- Show quoted text - > > >>>>>>>-------------- > > >>>>>>>To > >>>>>>> Doug > > >>>>>>>Give specific reply so that we may proceed further > > >>>>>>>Under what conditions energy is conseved? > > >>>>>>>Ajay Sharma www..AjayOnLine.us-Hidequoted > >>>>>>>text - > > >>>>>>>- Show quoted text - > > >>>>>>interesting- Hide quoted text - > > >>>>>>- Show quoted text - > > >>>>>------- > > >>>>>To > >>>>> Doug > > >>>>>Give specific reply so that we may proceed further > > >>>>There is no 'further' to proceed. Drake has already explained it to you. > >>>>We here have explained how he is correct and how you have misread what he > >>>>wrote. All have shown that your theory is wrong.- Hide quoted text - > > >>>>- Show quoted text - > > >>>To > > >>> Doug > > >>>Can you define Law of Conservation of Energy and which conditions it > >>>holds? > > >>Yes .. but that would serve no purpose. Drake has explained nicely why your > >>theory results in lack of conservation of energy (indeed, it generates > >>energy from nothing when A is not 1). If you don't understand conservation > >>of energy, you should not be publishing physics. If you do, you don't need > >>to ask me to explain it to you. Stop wasting everyone's time.- Hide quoted text - > > >>- Show quoted text - > > > ---------- > > > To > > Inertial > > > Like 8th class math, Dr Drake has misinterpretted Law of Conservation > > of Energy. > > He has applied Law of Conservation of energy, to NON-ISOLATED SYETEM. > > The value of 'A' has been calculated > > simply implies the condition, when LAW OF COSERVATION OF ENERGY HOLDS > > good to ISOLATED SYSTEM . > > > Here condition is A=1, it has nothing to do with E=Ac^2m. > > If we apply E=Ac^2m , to isolated system then results are OK. > > > Recently I have replied him in 15 page reply. I am also sending the > > letter to other officials of American Physical Society, > > so the they may also understand his high handedness and misuse of > > office and bad name he os getting to APS , New York > > He will have a good laugh except for being pestered by a crank. > The APS people will also have a good laugh. > > > > > > > AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - ----- To INERTIAL Can you define Law of Conservation of Energy ? Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us
From: ajay on 26 Oct 2009 17:05 On Oct 26, 5:14 pm, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Oct 26, 9:29 am, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: > > > > > > > ajay wrote: > > > On Oct 26, 4:22 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > > >>"ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > > >>news:26e25ae3-b3c7-48f4-9ded-79ac2088f30e(a)33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com.... > > > >>>On Oct 25, 7:15 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > > >>>>"ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > > >>>>news:24042f47-0c84-480c-9ff5-456fe39c6372(a)l31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com... > > > >>>>>On Oct 25, 4:28 am, tomy tomy <tomytomy...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > >>>>>>On Oct 24, 6:07 pm, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>On Oct 24, 5:13 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>"ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > > >>>>>>>>news:ef4961ff-3ab3-4d03-8f67-21efd534376e(a)33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com... > > > >>>>>>>>>On Oct 23, 8:04 pm, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>ajay wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>On Oct 23, 8:36 am, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>ajay wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> -------- > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>To > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>Inertial > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>How I can believe you , when did not form correct eqaution > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>pharse > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>''The high frequency photon is now passed through a machine > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>that converts it back into a hydrogen atom in its ground > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>state with mass M plus a low-frequency photon of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>frequency f '' > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>There are three energies here , but you say 4. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>there is no left over energy as you have claimed. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>Do you have any clue how silly you look with your constant > > >>>>>>>>>>>>whining? Drake explained your mistake. You cannot understand > > >>>>>>>>>>>>it. That is not his problem, it is yours. Get over it.- Hide > > >>>>>>>>>>>>quoted > > >>>>>>>>>>>>text - > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text - > > > >>>>>>>>>>>--------- > > >>>>>>>>>>>To > > >>>>>>>>>>> Doug > > > >>>>>>>>>>>Drake has simply shown his limitations in understanding of > > >>>>>>>>>>>LAW > > >>>>>>>>>>>OF > > >>>>>>>>>>>CONSERVATION OF ENERGY. > > > >>>>>>>>>>No, he was explaining to you why you do not conserve energy. > > >>>>>>>>>>You having tantrums here does not help your credibility here > > >>>>>>>>>>which is at zero. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us-Hidequotedtext- > > > >>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > >>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text - > > > >>>>>>>>>------------- > > >>>>>>>>>To > > >>>>>>>>> Doug > > > >>>>>>>>>Under what conditions energy is conseved? > > > >>>>>>>>You mean you don't know? And you're submitting papers? Your > > >>>>>>>>theory > > >>>>>>>>(that A > > >>>>>>>>is not always 1) results in energy not being conserved where it > > >>>>>>>>should be. > > >>>>>>>>Your theory breaks conservation laws. Your theory is refuted..- > > >>>>>>>>Hide > > >>>>>>>>quoted text - > > > >>>>>>>>- Show quoted text - > > > >>>>>>>-------------- > > > >>>>>>>To > > >>>>>>> Doug > > > >>>>>>>Give specific reply so that we may proceed further > > > >>>>>>>Under what conditions energy is conseved? > > > >>>>>>>Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us-Hidequoted > > >>>>>>>text - > > > >>>>>>>- Show quoted text - > > > >>>>>>interesting- Hide quoted text - > > > >>>>>>- Show quoted text - > > > >>>>>------- > > > >>>>>To > > >>>>> Doug > > > >>>>>Give specific reply so that we may proceed further > > > >>>>There is no 'further' to proceed. Drake has already explained it to you. > > >>>>We here have explained how he is correct and how you have misread what he > > >>>>wrote. All have shown that your theory is wrong.- Hide quoted text - > > > >>>>- Show quoted text - > > > >>>To > > > >>> Doug > > > >>>Can you define Law of Conservation of Energy and which conditions it > > >>>holds? > > > >>Yes .. but that would serve no purpose. Drake has explained nicely why your > > >>theory results in lack of conservation of energy (indeed, it generates > > >>energy from nothing when A is not 1). If you don't understand conservation > > >>of energy, you should not be publishing physics. If you do, you don't need > > >>to ask me to explain it to you. Stop wasting everyone's time.- Hide quoted text - > > > >>- Show quoted text - > > > > ---------- > > > > To > > > Inertial > > > > Like 8th class math, Dr Drake has misinterpretted Law of Conservation > > > of Energy. > > > He has applied Law of Conservation of energy, to NON-ISOLATED SYETEM. > > > The value of 'A' has been calculated > > > simply implies the condition, when LAW OF COSERVATION OF ENERGY HOLDS > > > good to ISOLATED SYSTEM . > > > > Here condition is A=1, it has nothing to do with E=Ac^2m. > > > If we apply E=Ac^2m , to isolated system then results are OK. > > > > Recently I have replied him in 15 page reply. I am also sending the > > > letter to other officials of American Physical Society, > > > so the they may also understand his high handedness and misuse of > > > office and bad name he os getting to APS , New York > > > He will have a good laugh except for being pestered by a crank. > > The APS people will also have a good laugh. > > > > AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us-Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > ----- > > To > INERTIAL > > Can you define Law of Conservation of Energy ? > > Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us
From: doug on 26 Oct 2009 18:22 ajay wrote: > On Oct 26, 5:14 pm, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>On Oct 26, 9:29 am, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>ajay wrote: >>> >>>>On Oct 26, 4:22 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: >> >>>>>"ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >> >>>>>news:26e25ae3-b3c7-48f4-9ded-79ac2088f30e(a)33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com... >> >>>>>>On Oct 25, 7:15 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>"ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >> >>>>>>>news:24042f47-0c84-480c-9ff5-456fe39c6372(a)l31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com... >> >>>>>>>>On Oct 25, 4:28 am, tomy tomy <tomytomy...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>On Oct 24, 6:07 pm, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>On Oct 24, 5:13 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>>"ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >> >>>>>>>>>>>news:ef4961ff-3ab3-4d03-8f67-21efd534376e(a)33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com... >> >>>>>>>>>>>>On Oct 23, 8:04 pm, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>ajay wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>On Oct 23, 8:36 am, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ajay wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>-------- >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>To >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Inertial >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>How I can believe you , when did not form correct eqaution >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>pharse >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>''The high frequency photon is now passed through a machine >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that converts it back into a hydrogen atom in its ground >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>state with mass M plus a low-frequency photon of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>frequency f '' >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>There are three energies here , but you say 4. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>there is no left over energy as you have claimed. >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Do you have any clue how silly you look with your constant >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>whining? Drake explained your mistake. You cannot understand >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>it. That is not his problem, it is yours. Get over it.- Hide >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>quoted >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>text - >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text - >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>--------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>To >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Doug >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Drake has simply shown his limitations in understanding of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>LAW >>>>>>>>>>>>>>OF >>>>>>>>>>>>>>CONSERVATION OF ENERGY. >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>No, he was explaining to you why you do not conserve energy. >>>>>>>>>>>>>You having tantrums here does not help your credibility here >>>>>>>>>>>>>which is at zero. >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us-Hidequotedtext- >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text - >> >>>>>>>>>>>>------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>To >>>>>>>>>>>> Doug >> >>>>>>>>>>>>Under what conditions energy is conseved? >> >>>>>>>>>>>You mean you don't know? And you're submitting papers? Your >>>>>>>>>>>theory >>>>>>>>>>>(that A >>>>>>>>>>>is not always 1) results in energy not being conserved where it >>>>>>>>>>>should be. >>>>>>>>>>>Your theory breaks conservation laws. Your theory is refuted.- >>>>>>>>>>>Hide >>>>>>>>>>>quoted text - >> >>>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text - >> >>>>>>>>>>-------------- >> >>>>>>>>>>To >>>>>>>>>> Doug >> >>>>>>>>>>Give specific reply so that we may proceed further >> >>>>>>>>>>Under what conditions energy is conseved? >> >>>>>>>>>>Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us-Hidequoted >>>>>>>>>>text - >> >>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text - >> >>>>>>>>>interesting- Hide quoted text - >> >>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text - >> >>>>>>>>------- >> >>>>>>>>To >>>>>>>>Doug >> >>>>>>>>Give specific reply so that we may proceed further >> >>>>>>>There is no 'further' to proceed. Drake has already explained it to you. >>>>>>>We here have explained how he is correct and how you have misread what he >>>>>>>wrote. All have shown that your theory is wrong.- Hide quoted text - >> >>>>>>>- Show quoted text - >> >>>>>>To >> >>>>>> Doug >> >>>>>>Can you define Law of Conservation of Energy and which conditions it >>>>>>holds? >> >>>>>Yes .. but that would serve no purpose. Drake has explained nicely why your >>>>>theory results in lack of conservation of energy (indeed, it generates >>>>>energy from nothing when A is not 1). If you don't understand conservation >>>>>of energy, you should not be publishing physics. If you do, you don't need >>>>>to ask me to explain it to you. Stop wasting everyone's time.- Hide quoted text - >> >>>>>- Show quoted text - >> >>>>---------- >> >>>>To >>>>Inertial >> >>>>Like 8th class math, Dr Drake has misinterpretted Law of Conservation >>>>of Energy. >>>>He has applied Law of Conservation of energy, to NON-ISOLATED SYETEM. >>>>The value of 'A' has been calculated >>>>simply implies the condition, when LAW OF COSERVATION OF ENERGY HOLDS >>>>good to ISOLATED SYSTEM . >> >>>>Here condition is A=1, it has nothing to do with E=Ac^2m. >>>>If we apply E=Ac^2m , to isolated system then results are OK. >> >>>>Recently I have replied him in 15 page reply. I am also sending the >>>>letter to other officials of American Physical Society, >>>>so the they may also understand his high handedness and misuse of >>>>office and bad name he os getting to APS , New York >> >>>He will have a good laugh except for being pestered by a crank. >>>The APS people will also have a good laugh. >> >>>>AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us-Hide quoted text - >> >>>- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - >> >>>- Show quoted text - >> >>----- >> >>To >> INERTIAL >> >>Can you define Law of Conservation of Energy ? >> >>Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us- Hide quoted text - >> >>- Show quoted text - > > > AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us Have you made any progress trying to understand Drakes explanation of your mistake?
From: Inertial on 26 Oct 2009 19:15 "ajay" <ajayonline.us(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:53f3cd8c-be8b-4239-b754-2ca262edcfde(a)u13g2000vbb.googlegroups.com... > On Oct 26, 9:29 am, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: >> ajay wrote: >> > On Oct 26, 4:22 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: >> >> >>"ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >> >> >>news:26e25ae3-b3c7-48f4-9ded-79ac2088f30e(a)33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com... >> >> >>>On Oct 25, 7:15 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: >> >> >>>>"ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >> >> >>>>news:24042f47-0c84-480c-9ff5-456fe39c6372(a)l31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com... >> >> >>>>>On Oct 25, 4:28 am, tomy tomy <tomytomy...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>>>>>On Oct 24, 6:07 pm, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>>>>>>On Oct 24, 5:13 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: >> >> >>>>>>>>"ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >> >> >>>>>>>>news:ef4961ff-3ab3-4d03-8f67-21efd534376e(a)33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com... >> >> >>>>>>>>>On Oct 23, 8:04 pm, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: >> >> >>>>>>>>>>ajay wrote: >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>On Oct 23, 8:36 am, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>ajay wrote: >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> -------- >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>To >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>Inertial >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>How I can believe you , when did not form correct eqaution >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>for >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>pharse >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>''The high frequency photon is now passed through a machine >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>that converts it back into a hydrogen atom in its ground >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>state with mass M plus a low-frequency photon of >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>frequency f '' >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>There are three energies here , but you say 4. >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>there is no left over energy as you have claimed. >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>Do you have any clue how silly you look with your constant >> >>>>>>>>>>>>whining? Drake explained your mistake. You cannot understand >> >>>>>>>>>>>>it. That is not his problem, it is yours. Get over it.- Hide >> >>>>>>>>>>>>quoted >> >>>>>>>>>>>>text - >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text - >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>--------- >> >>>>>>>>>>>To >> >>>>>>>>>>> Doug >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>Drake has simply shown his limitations in understanding of >> >>>>>>>>>>>LAW >> >>>>>>>>>>>OF >> >>>>>>>>>>>CONSERVATION OF ENERGY. >> >> >>>>>>>>>>No, he was explaining to you why you do not conserve energy. >> >>>>>>>>>>You having tantrums here does not help your credibility here >> >>>>>>>>>>which is at zero. >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us-Hidequotedtext- >> >> >>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - >> >> >>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text - >> >> >>>>>>>>>------------- >> >>>>>>>>>To >> >>>>>>>>> Doug >> >> >>>>>>>>>Under what conditions energy is conseved? >> >> >>>>>>>>You mean you don't know? And you're submitting papers? Your >> >>>>>>>>theory >> >>>>>>>>(that A >> >>>>>>>>is not always 1) results in energy not being conserved where it >> >>>>>>>>should be. >> >>>>>>>>Your theory breaks conservation laws. Your theory is refuted.- >> >>>>>>>>Hide >> >>>>>>>>quoted text - >> >> >>>>>>>>- Show quoted text - >> >> >>>>>>>-------------- >> >> >>>>>>>To >> >>>>>>> Doug >> >> >>>>>>>Give specific reply so that we may proceed further >> >> >>>>>>>Under what conditions energy is conseved? >> >> >>>>>>>Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us-Hidequoted >> >>>>>>>text - >> >> >>>>>>>- Show quoted text - >> >> >>>>>>interesting- Hide quoted text - >> >> >>>>>>- Show quoted text - >> >> >>>>>------- >> >> >>>>>To >> >>>>> Doug >> >> >>>>>Give specific reply so that we may proceed further >> >> >>>>There is no 'further' to proceed. Drake has already explained it to >> >>>>you. >> >>>>We here have explained how he is correct and how you have misread >> >>>>what he >> >>>>wrote. All have shown that your theory is wrong.- Hide quoted text - >> >> >>>>- Show quoted text - >> >> >>>To >> >> >>> Doug >> >> >>>Can you define Law of Conservation of Energy and which conditions it >> >>>holds? >> >> >>Yes .. but that would serve no purpose. Drake has explained nicely why >> >>your >> >>theory results in lack of conservation of energy (indeed, it generates >> >>energy from nothing when A is not 1). If you don't understand >> >>conservation >> >>of energy, you should not be publishing physics. If you do, you don't >> >>need >> >>to ask me to explain it to you. Stop wasting everyone's time.- Hide >> >>quoted text - >> >> >>- Show quoted text - >> >> > ---------- >> >> > To >> > Inertial >> >> > Like 8th class math, Dr Drake has misinterpretted Law of Conservation >> > of Energy. >> > He has applied Law of Conservation of energy, to NON-ISOLATED SYETEM. >> > The value of 'A' has been calculated >> > simply implies the condition, when LAW OF COSERVATION OF ENERGY HOLDS >> > good to ISOLATED SYSTEM . >> >> > Here condition is A=1, it has nothing to do with E=Ac^2m. >> > If we apply E=Ac^2m , to isolated system then results are OK. >> >> > Recently I have replied him in 15 page reply. I am also sending the >> > letter to other officials of American Physical Society, >> > so the they may also understand his high handedness and misuse of >> > office and bad name he os getting to APS , New York >> >> He will have a good laugh except for being pestered by a crank. >> The APS people will also have a good laugh. >> >> >> >> >> >> > AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > ----- > > To > INERTIAL > > Can you define Law of Conservation of Energy ? Yes.. I've told you that already.
From: zimdoo zimdoo on 28 Oct 2009 12:45
On Oct 28, 6:03 pm, ajay <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Oct 28, 1:05 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > > > > "ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > >news:e9f3199f-8cd2-472f-923d-d645b0659c20(a)w37g2000prg.googlegroups.com.... > > > > On Oct 28, 7:31 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > >> "ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > > >>news:9a0ddcf1-d5a5-4f73-b1a2-eee29d44d5ea(a)y23g2000yqd.googlegroups.com... > > > >> > On Oct 28, 4:50 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > >> >> "ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > > >> >>news:9ccf4809-6d9b-4ac6-a229-1c372b4bdb8c(a)k19g2000yqc.googlegroups..com... > > > >> >> > On Oct 28, 2:37 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > >> >> >> "ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > > >> >> >>news:5251bec5-f96d-4665-aa1b-898c9a3e7829(a)s15g2000yqs.googlegroups.com... > > > >> >> >> > On Oct 27, 6:34 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > >> >> >> >> "ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > > >> >> >> >>news:12180349-a918-4c71-b5fb-ff8ae1f5efb4(a)n22g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... > > > >> >> >> >> > On Oct 27, 5:36 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > >> >> >> >> >> "ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > > >> >> >> >> >>news:88e8dcd3-1fd7-4741-9d74-41d3756ca082(a)p8g2000yqb.googlegroups.com... > > > >> >> >> >> >> > On Oct 27, 7:31 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > >> >> >> >> >> >> "ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > > >> >> >> >> >> >>news:bbd4e288-8223-460c-8541-b01ce80e8a63(a)j4g2000yqe.googlegroups.com... > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Oct 27, 4:14 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > wrote: > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> "ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >>news:92b88413-f59b-4457-82b6-0288751f1840(a)p9g2000vbl.googlegroups.com... > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Oct 26, 4:22 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > wrote: > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> "ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>news:26e25ae3-b3c7-48f4-9ded-79ac2088f30e(a)33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com... > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Oct 25, 7:15 pm, "Inertial" > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > <relativ...(a)rest.com> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > wrote: > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> "ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>news:24042f47-0c84-480c-9ff5-456fe39c6372(a)l31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com... > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Oct 25, 4:28 am, tomy tomy > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > <tomytomy...(a)gmail.com> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > wrote: > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Oct 24, 6:07 pm, ajay > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> wrote: > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Oct 24, 5:13 am, "Inertial" > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > <relativ...(a)rest.com> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > wrote: > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > "ajay" <ajayonline...(a)gmail.com> wrote in > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > message > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >news:ef4961ff-3ab3-4d03-8f67-21efd534376e(a)33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com... > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > On Oct 23, 8:04 pm, doug <x...(a)xx.com> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > wrote: > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> ajay wrote: > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> > On Oct 23, 8:36 am, doug > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> > <x...(a)xx.com> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> > wrote: > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>ajay wrote: > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> -------- > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>To > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>Inertial > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>How I can believe you , when did not > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>form > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>correct > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>eqaution > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>for > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>pharse > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>''The high frequency photon is now > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>passed > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>through a > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>machine > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>that converts it back into a > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>hydrogen > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>atom > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>in > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>its > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>ground > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>state with mass M plus a > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>low-frequency > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>photon > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>of > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>> frequency f '' > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>There are three energies here , but > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>you > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>say > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>4. > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>> there is no left over energy as you > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>> have > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>> claimed. > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>Ajay Sharma > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>>www.AjayOnLine.us > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>Do you have any clue how silly you > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>look > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>with > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>your > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>constant > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>whining? Drake explained your > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>mistake. > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>You > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>cannot > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>understand > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>it. That is not his problem, it is > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>yours. > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>Get > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>over > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>it.- > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>Hide > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>quoted > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>text - > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >>- Show quoted text - > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> > --------- > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> > To > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> > Doug > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> > Drake has simply shown his > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> > limitations > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> > in > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> > understanding > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> > of > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> > LAW > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> > OF > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> > CONSERVATION OF ENERGY. > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> No, he was explaining to you why you do > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> not > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> conserve > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> energy. > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> You having tantrums here does not help > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> your > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> credibility > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> here > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> which is at zero. > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> > Ajay Sharma > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >www.AjayOnLine.us-Hidequotedtext- > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> text - > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ------------- > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > To > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > Doug > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > Under what conditions energy is > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > conseved? > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > You mean you don't know? And you're > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > submitting > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > papers? > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > Your > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > theory > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > (that A > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > is not always 1) results in energy not > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > being > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > conserved > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > where > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > it > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > should be. > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > Your theory breaks conservation laws. > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > Your > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > theory > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > is > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > refuted.- > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > Hide > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > quoted text - > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > - Show quoted text - > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > -------------- > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > To > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Doug > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Give specific reply so that we may proceed > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > further > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Under what conditions energy is conseved? > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Ajay Sharma > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >www.AjayOnLine.us-Hidequoted > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > text - > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > - Show quoted text - > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> interesting- Hide quoted text - > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> - Show quoted text - > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > ------- > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > To > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Doug > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Give specific reply so that we may proceed > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > further > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> There is no 'further' to proceed. Drake has > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> already > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> explained- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -... > > read more » -------- Inertial You are making tall claims then why dont you define Law of Conservation of Momentum. Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us |