Prev: Was Einstein Guilty of Scientific Fraud?
Next: Light is the unified form of the universe
From: Edward Green on 27 May 2010 21:22
On May 26, 7:33 am, "Sue..." <suzysewns...(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote:

Ping Sue...

Sorry to break in, but would you mind posting the link to that physics
site you usually refer people to? Thanks ever so much.

P.S. If the link pointed to the page where he derives mass/energy
equivalence, that would be even better.

Ed
From: Sue... on 28 May 2010 02:45
On May 27, 9:22 pm, Edward Green <ergjo...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 26, 7:33 am, "Sue..." <suzysewns...(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> Ping Sue...
>
> Sorry to break in, but would you mind posting the link to that physics
> site you usually refer people to? Thanks ever so much.
>
> P.S. If the link pointed to the page where he derives mass/energy
> equivalence, that would be even better.

I think you may mean these two clickable equations.
<<Thus, we can account for the ever decreasing acceleration of a
particle subject to a constant force [see Eq. (1542)] by supposing
that the inertial mass of the particle increases with its velocity
according to the rule (1546). >>
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node126.html

If you want to "drill baby drill" a bit more,
these might be helpful.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_stress-energy_tensor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poynting_vector

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass%E2%80%93energy_equivalence#Efficiency

Sue...

>
> Ed

From: Edward Green on 28 May 2010 15:29
On May 28, 2:45 am, "Sue..." <suzysewns...(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> On May 27, 9:22 pm, Edward Green <ergjo...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On May 26, 7:33 am, "Sue..." <suzysewns...(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> > Ping Sue...
>
> > Sorry to break in, but would you mind posting the link to that physics
> > site you usually refer people to? Thanks ever so much.
>
> > P.S. If the link pointed to the page where he derives mass/energy
> > equivalence, that would be even better.
>
> I think you may mean these two clickable equations.
> <<Thus, we can account for the ever decreasing acceleration of a
> particle subject to a constant force [see Eq. (1542)] by supposing
> that the inertial mass of the particle increases with its velocity
> according to the rule (1546). >>http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node126.html
>
> If you want to "drill baby drill" a bit more,
> these might be helpful.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_stress-energy_tensorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poynting_vector
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass%E2%80%93energy_equivalence#Efficiency

Thanks!
From: Henry Wilson DSc on 28 May 2010 19:08
On Wed, 26 May 2010 00:14:51 -0700 (PDT), Benj <bjacoby(a)iwaynet.net> wrote:

>On May 24, 8:04�pm, ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc) wrote:
>
>> good idea...but the thing needs to be pretty heavy to overcome the pressure.
>>
>> Henry Wilson...
>
>Ok, We are all "smarter than Einstein" here, so just how heavy does
>the pole need to be? And then given the density of cement, how long
>does it need to be. Is it feasible to build such a pole? How would
>you do it? (note cement will harden under water!)
>
>The solution to this problem will count toward your midterm grade not
>to mention toward saving all life on the planet!

The density of cement is lower under water. Say 1.5 tonnes/m3

The hardest part would be to hold the sharp point of the plug over the centre
of the hole while it is lowered. Also it appears that the top of the hole is
damaged and the oil would soon find a way around the plug.

What size is the pipe? 4 inch? 6 inch? say 20 sq inch area

So the plug has to be at least 60000 pounds.

Thirty tons should do the job. ...say sixty tons out of the water



Henry Wilson...

........Einstein's Relativity...The religion that worships negative space.
From: Benj on 5 Jun 2010 03:20
On May 28, 7:08 pm, ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc) wrote:

> The density of cement is lower under water. Say 1.5 tonnes/m3
>
> The hardest part would be to hold the sharp point of the plug over the centre
> of the hole while it is lowered. Also it appears that the top of the hole is
> damaged and the oil would soon find a way around the plug.
>
> What size is the pipe? 4 inch?  6 inch? say 20 sq inch area
>
> So the plug has to be at least 60000 pounds.
>
> Thirty tons should do the job. ...say sixty tons out of the water

Actually on the NBC news Brian Williams had a piece of pipe on his
desk supposedly like the one down there. It was about 18" in diameter.
Or about 250 sq. Inch area. Which means it needs to be 12.7 times
heavier or 760 tons out of the water. So at about 2 tons per cubic
yard we are talking about a mere 380 cubic yards of concrete
(reinforced with steel, of course)

Note that efficacy of this method is that the "valve" portion which is
the needle confines the pressure to the 18" diameter pipe, rather than
the "house" that BP tried to place over the whole thing.

So now the original question was "how long" does this "needle valve"
need to be. 18" pipe. (ignore taper for the moment and assume
cylindrical cement 18" in diameter) So how long a "needle" is 380
cubic yards of concrete? You can do it! Save the world! AND you can
prove your are "smarter than BP" if not "smarter than Einstein"!










First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Was Einstein Guilty of Scientific Fraud?
Next: Light is the unified form of the universe