Author Topic: What becomes of old 'friends'..  (Read 479492 times)

Offline frenat

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 460
Re: What becomes of old 'friends'..
« Reply #720 on: September 22, 2013, 06:43:09 PM »
You don't have to register to post at GLP.  That is why the place is infested with "anonymous cowards".  Of course if you prefer to register just start up a new email with yahoo or gmail.
-Reality is not determined by your lack of comprehension.
 -Never let facts stand in the way of a good conspiracy theory.
 -There are no bad ideas, just great ideas that go horribly wrong.

Offline Humots

  • Mercury
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: What becomes of old 'friends'..
« Reply #721 on: September 22, 2013, 07:22:06 PM »
Ok, thanks!
"It's not the things we don't know that hurt us, It's the things we do know that aren't so.”  --Artemus Ward

“It never ceases to amaze me how utterly unintelligent a person can be and still believe they are somehow accomplishing something.”  --Interdimensional Warrior

Offline frenat

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 460
Re: What becomes of old 'friends'..
« Reply #722 on: September 22, 2013, 08:19:47 PM »
I'm registered and haven't had any problems.  The "karma" system is a joke so most times I post I don't bother to log in. 
-Reality is not determined by your lack of comprehension.
 -Never let facts stand in the way of a good conspiracy theory.
 -There are no bad ideas, just great ideas that go horribly wrong.

Offline smartcooky

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1959
Re: What becomes of old 'friends'..
« Reply #723 on: September 22, 2013, 11:29:35 PM »
Quote
"E = M C^2 Proved bunk:

Closely examine that equation. If it is an algebraic equation as it's form suggests, then the algebraic solution for C produces C = SQRT(E/M) This translates basically into "if you transform matter into energy C has to increase or the equation produces an inequality".In an algebraic form, C cannot be a constant unless both E and M are constant and never vary"

He's got the algebra transposition wrong. Its not  C=√(E/M) its C=E/M2

As far as I can remember, constants are rarely if ever placed on the left side of the equation, even though the result would still be valid.

in a circle  c = πD, transposes to D=c/π.  It is also every bit as valid to say π=c/D, its just pointless because you already know the value of π

E=MC2 transposes to M=E/C2. C=E/M2, while valid, it pointless as we already know the value of C
If you're not a scientist but you think you've destroyed the foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that you're wrong.

Offline qt

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 48
Re: What becomes of old 'friends'..
« Reply #724 on: September 22, 2013, 11:42:27 PM »
He's got the algebra transposition wrong. Its not  C=√(E/M) its C=E/M2

Can you show us how you're getting that?

His maths (as I have seen them quoted here, I didn't go to the original - my IP address is blocked) look OK to me, it's the interpretation which is all moonshine.

in a circle  c = πD, transposes to D=c/π.  It is also every bit as valid to say π=c/D, its just pointless because you already know the value of π

I think there are different styles out there.  I write <stuff>=<constant> all the time, particularly when it is awkward to solve <stuff> explicitly for one of the variables.  If <stuff> is differentiable in all the variables, you can get a nice linear equation for infinitesimal changes, which can be solved for any variable desired, even if <stuff> is quite complicated.
« Last Edit: September 22, 2013, 11:44:57 PM by qt »

Offline Jason Thompson

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1601
Re: What becomes of old 'friends'..
« Reply #725 on: September 23, 2013, 04:38:09 AM »
He's got the algebra transposition wrong. Its not  C=√(E/M) its C=E/M2

...

E=MC2 transposes to M=E/C2. C=E/M2, while valid, it pointless as we already know the value of C

I'm pretty sure his rearrangement is correct.

E = mc2

Divide both sides my m: E/m = c2

Therefore c = √(E/m)
"There's this idea that everyone's opinion is equally valid. My arse! Bloke who was a professor of dentistry for forty years does NOT have a debate with some eejit who removes his teeth with string and a door!"  - Dara O'Briain

Offline smartcooky

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1959
Re: What becomes of old 'friends'..
« Reply #726 on: September 23, 2013, 05:56:49 AM »
I was going to launch into an explanation about checking by substitution and while doing so, realised I had it wrong. Oops!

However, it still doesn't make what he said afterwards right. This....

"if you transform matter into energy C has to increase or the equation produces an inequality"

.... is utter rubbish.

You have to start with "C" as a constant because that is what it is. Putting a constant as the result means that the variables on the right hand side must change in relation to each other; that is the whole issue with the constant being... well... constant!

e.g. we know that the value of π is 3.14159. Its the circumference of a circle divided by its diameter. That is a FIXED relationship, defined by π, just as the relationship between matter and energy is defined by C. You can't have a matter/energy relationship that equates to a value of C greater than the speed of light any more than you can have a circle whose circumference is five times its diameter!! 






 
If you're not a scientist but you think you've destroyed the foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that you're wrong.

Offline Jason Thompson

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1601
Re: What becomes of old 'friends'..
« Reply #727 on: September 23, 2013, 07:54:58 AM »
This....

"if you transform matter into energy C has to increase or the equation produces an inequality"

.... is utter rubbish.

Indeed. As you say, if E increases m does along with it. That's pretty much the whole point of the equation showing the relationship.
"There's this idea that everyone's opinion is equally valid. My arse! Bloke who was a professor of dentistry for forty years does NOT have a debate with some eejit who removes his teeth with string and a door!"  - Dara O'Briain

Offline twik

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 595
Re: What becomes of old 'friends'..
« Reply #728 on: September 23, 2013, 02:29:38 PM »
I think he's assuming that if you (somehow) increase E, mass "magically" increases to match it. Instead, the only variable that can be manipulated here is mass. If you increase the mass, you'll increase the energy.

It would be like if C is miles per gallon on your car (assuming that is a constant*). The variable you can manipulate is the gallons of gasoline you add. More gas, more miles; less gas, fewer miles. You can't say, "Oh, mpg can't be a constant, because if you drove twice the miles, how would you automatically get twice the gasoline in your tank? Magic?"

*Of course, it isn't, but let's say all other variables are being controlled.

The way you get more E is to provide more m. You can't increase E otherwise.

Offline Humots

  • Mercury
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: What becomes of old 'friends'..
« Reply #729 on: September 23, 2013, 03:29:22 PM »
IDW had already "admitted" to a mistake on the thread about how MRI worked:

Quote
To be perfectly honest I never took the time to actually read how magnetic resonance imaging worked.

I have a fairly accurate idea now.

No one has the time to learn everything.

If I were ever going to be subjected to one, I would have studied it more intensively.

I simply made the most obvious assumption, that it utilized the iron present in all human cells to image them by inducing a resonant vibration with an oscillating magnetic field and detecting it with coils. At any rate it doesn't sound any safer and wiser to me now, knowing how it actually works than it did before.

I can't help but think utilizing the iron present would be the more simpler approach using magnetism to image the human body.

and I hoped that he might see the light.  No such luck.

I'm probably not going to post at Godlike any more.  I have better things to do with my time. 

"It's not the things we don't know that hurt us, It's the things we do know that aren't so.”  --Artemus Ward

“It never ceases to amaze me how utterly unintelligent a person can be and still believe they are somehow accomplishing something.”  --Interdimensional Warrior

Offline Jason Thompson

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1601
Re: What becomes of old 'friends'..
« Reply #730 on: September 23, 2013, 05:09:53 PM »
There's only so much you can do with someone who insists that the worldwide application of a particular method of imaging the human body in great detail is for some reason not as good as his layman's 'simpler' version of how it should be done. He can't understand that there's a good reason why his 'simper' way of doing it has not been adopted: it doesn't work!

Of course explaining to him that he has fallen into the same fallacy of assuming iron is inherently magnetic because, well, we all know iron is, right? would be a waste of time, since he can't grasp the idea that metallic iron is magnetic but the iron in haemoglobin is not in a metallic state and is therefore not magnetic. This is also why the idea of 'magnetic healing bracelets' is bunk....
"There's this idea that everyone's opinion is equally valid. My arse! Bloke who was a professor of dentistry for forty years does NOT have a debate with some eejit who removes his teeth with string and a door!"  - Dara O'Briain

Offline twik

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 595
Re: What becomes of old 'friends'..
« Reply #731 on: October 07, 2013, 12:07:26 PM »
I was reading another conspiracy theorist ("Aliens did it!"), and something struck me, that most of them are very reluctant to fully explain what exactly they mean. They tend to answer questions with obfuscations like "Think about it," or "I'm not going to do your research," or "A + B = C, therefore D = apricot. I'm not going to spell it out for you."  I'm not sure if this indicates that they're aware that their arguments are weak, or whether this is simply their normal way of thinking, and they expect that rampant jumps to conclusions are actually convincing.

Offline PetersCreek

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 43
Re: What becomes of old 'friends'..
« Reply #732 on: October 07, 2013, 02:56:28 PM »
Not that I'm a psychologist (or play one on TV) but I think the emotional payoff for many CTists is in "knowing the truth" behind the supposed conspiracy that completely dupes mere mortals and that knowledge feels like power. Giving up up too much of that "knowledge" or doing so in a time/manner not of their own choosing is to give up a measure of that power.

Offline Echnaton

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1490
Re: What becomes of old 'friends'..
« Reply #733 on: October 07, 2013, 03:42:23 PM »
I was reading another conspiracy theorist ("Aliens did it!"), and something struck me, that most of them are very reluctant to fully explain what exactly they mean. They tend to answer questions with obfuscations like "Think about it," or "I'm not going to do your research," or "A + B = C, therefore D = apricot. I'm not going to spell it out for you."  I'm not sure if this indicates that they're aware that their arguments are weak, or whether this is simply their normal way of thinking, and they expect that rampant jumps to conclusions are actually convincing.
I tend to think they just want to believe themselves to be smart but know, in some way, that they are not.  This makes them angry and self loathing, so they cover it with bluster.  Smart as in raw intelligence and clear thinking.  Sometimes they are the former, but never the latter.  But we have had enough HBs that don't fit this model over the years, so it has a rather limited scope of application. Another theory of mine it excessive testosterone. 
The sun shone, having no alternative, on the nothing new. —Samuel Beckett

Offline smartcooky

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1959
Re: What becomes of old 'friends'..
« Reply #734 on: October 07, 2013, 09:05:22 PM »
I was reading another conspiracy theorist ("Aliens did it!"), and something struck me, that most of them are very reluctant to fully explain what exactly they mean. They tend to answer questions with obfuscations like "Think about it," or "I'm not going to do your research," or "A + B = C, therefore D = apricot. I'm not going to spell it out for you."  I'm not sure if this indicates that they're aware that their arguments are weak, or whether this is simply their normal way of thinking, and they expect that rampant jumps to conclusions are actually convincing.

That sounds like this guy.....

« Last Edit: October 07, 2013, 09:21:39 PM by smartcooky »
If you're not a scientist but you think you've destroyed the foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that you're wrong.