 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Physics Forum » Editor of Physical Review A, Dr Gordon W.F. Drake does... |
|
Page 9 of 16 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10 ... 14, 15, 16 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| ajay... |
 Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 3:07 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 24, 5:13 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
[quote]"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ef4961ff-3ab3-4d03-8f67-21efd534376e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 23, 8:04 pm, doug <x... at (no spam) xx.com> wrote:
ajay wrote:
On Oct 23, 8:36 am, doug <x... at (no spam) 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-Hide quoted text -
- 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 -
[/quote]
--------------
To
Doug
Give specific reply so that we may proceed further
Under what conditions energy is conseved?
Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| tomy tomy... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 1:28 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 24, 6:07 pm, ajay <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 24, 5:13 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ef4961ff-3ab3-4d03-8f67-21efd534376e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 23, 8:04 pm, doug <x... at (no spam) xx.com> wrote:
ajay wrote:
On Oct 23, 8:36 am, doug <x... at (no spam) 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-Hidequoted text -
- 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- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
interesting |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ajay... |
| Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 4:06 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 25, 4:28 am, tomy tomy <tomytomy... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 24, 6:07 pm, ajay <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 5:13 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ef4961ff-3ab3-4d03-8f67-21efd534376e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com....
On Oct 23, 8:04 pm, doug <x... at (no spam) xx.com> wrote:
ajay wrote:
On Oct 23, 8:36 am, doug <x... at (no spam) 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-Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
interesting- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
-------
To
Doug
Give specific reply so that we may proceed further
Under what conditions energy is conseved?
Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ajay... |
| Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:56 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 25, 7:15 pm, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
[quote]"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:24042f47-0c84-480c-9ff5-456fe39c6372 at (no spam) l31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 25, 4:28 am, tomy tomy <tomytomy... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 6:07 pm, ajay <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 5:13 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ef4961ff-3ab3-4d03-8f67-21efd534376e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 23, 8:04 pm, doug <x... at (no spam) xx.com> wrote:
ajay wrote:
On Oct 23, 8:36 am, doug <x... at (no spam) 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 -
[/quote]
To
Doug
Can you define Law of Conservation of Energy and which conditions it
holds?
AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ajay... |
| Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:59 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 25, 7:15 pm, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
[quote]"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:24042f47-0c84-480c-9ff5-456fe39c6372 at (no spam) l31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 25, 4:28 am, tomy tomy <tomytomy... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 6:07 pm, ajay <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 5:13 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ef4961ff-3ab3-4d03-8f67-21efd534376e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 23, 8:04 pm, doug <x... at (no spam) xx.com> wrote:
ajay wrote:
On Oct 23, 8:36 am, doug <x... at (no spam) 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 -
------------[/quote]
To
Inertial
Can you define Law of Conservation of Energy and which conditions it
holds?
AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| doug... |
| Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 11:26 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
ajay wrote:
[quote]On Oct 25, 4:28 am, tomy tomy <tomytomy... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 6:07 pm, ajay <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 5:13 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ef4961ff-3ab3-4d03-8f67-21efd534376e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 23, 8:04 pm, doug <x... at (no spam) xx.com> wrote:
ajay wrote:
On Oct 23, 8:36 am, doug <x... at (no spam) 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-Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
interesting- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
-------
To
Doug
Give specific reply so that we may proceed further
Under what conditions energy is conseved?
Read Drakes writeup. He explains it quite well. If you do[/quote]
not understand that, there is no hope for you.
[quote]
Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us
[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ajay... |
| Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 4:21 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 26, 4:22 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
[quote]"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:26e25ae3-b3c7-48f4-9ded-79ac2088f30e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 25, 7:15 pm, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:24042f47-0c84-480c-9ff5-456fe39c6372 at (no spam) l31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com....
On Oct 25, 4:28 am, tomy tomy <tomytomy... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 6:07 pm, ajay <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 5:13 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ef4961ff-3ab3-4d03-8f67-21efd534376e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 23, 8:04 pm, doug <x... at (no spam) xx.com> wrote:
ajay wrote:
On Oct 23, 8:36 am, doug <x... at (no spam) 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 -
[/quote]
----------
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
AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ajay... |
| Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 4:21 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 26, 4:23 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
[quote]"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fdd462a3-2a74-4a46-8ba2-8c9255bc678c at (no spam) e34g2000vbc.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 25, 7:15 pm, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:24042f47-0c84-480c-9ff5-456fe39c6372 at (no spam) l31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com....
On Oct 25, 4:28 am, tomy tomy <tomytomy... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 6:07 pm, ajay <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 5:13 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ef4961ff-3ab3-4d03-8f67-21efd534376e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 23, 8:04 pm, doug <x... at (no spam) xx.com> wrote:
ajay wrote:
On Oct 23, 8:36 am, doug <x... at (no spam) 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 -
------------
To
Inertial
Can you define Law of Conservation of Energy and which conditions it
holds?
If you don't know what it is, you shouldn't be publishing physics. If you
do know, then there is no point in asking me to tell you what it is. You
are wasting everyone's time with your nonsense.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
--------[/quote]
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
AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us
- |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| doug... |
| Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 10:29 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
ajay wrote:
[quote]On Oct 26, 4:22 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:26e25ae3-b3c7-48f4-9ded-79ac2088f30e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 25, 7:15 pm, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:24042f47-0c84-480c-9ff5-456fe39c6372 at (no spam) l31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 25, 4:28 am, tomy tomy <tomytomy... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 6:07 pm, ajay <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 5:13 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ef4961ff-3ab3-4d03-8f67-21efd534376e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 23, 8:04 pm, doug <x... at (no spam) xx.com> wrote:
ajay wrote:
On Oct 23, 8:36 am, doug <x... at (no spam) 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
[/quote]
He will have a good laugh except for being pestered by a crank.
The APS people will also have a good laugh.
[quote]
AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ajay... |
| Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 2:14 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 26, 9:29 am, doug <x... at (no spam) xx.com> wrote:
[quote]ajay wrote:
On Oct 26, 4:22 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:26e25ae3-b3c7-48f4-9ded-79ac2088f30e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com....
On Oct 25, 7:15 pm, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:24042f47-0c84-480c-9ff5-456fe39c6372 at (no spam) l31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 25, 4:28 am, tomy tomy <tomytomy... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 6:07 pm, ajay <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 5:13 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ef4961ff-3ab3-4d03-8f67-21efd534376e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups..com...
On Oct 23, 8:04 pm, doug <x... at (no spam) xx.com> wrote:
ajay wrote:
On Oct 23, 8:36 am, doug <x... at (no spam) 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 -
[/quote]
-----
To
INERTIAL
Can you define Law of Conservation of Energy ?
Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ajay... |
| Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 11:05 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 26, 5:14 pm, ajay <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 26, 9:29 am, doug <x... at (no spam) xx.com> wrote:
ajay wrote:
On Oct 26, 4:22 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:26e25ae3-b3c7-48f4-9ded-79ac2088f30e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com....
On Oct 25, 7:15 pm, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:24042f47-0c84-480c-9ff5-456fe39c6372 at (no spam) l31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 25, 4:28 am, tomy tomy <tomytomy... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 6:07 pm, ajay <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 5:13 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ef4961ff-3ab3-4d03-8f67-21efd534376e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 23, 8:04 pm, doug <x... at (no spam) xx.com> wrote:
ajay wrote:
On Oct 23, 8:36 am, doug <x... at (no spam) 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 -
[/quote]
AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| doug... |
| Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 4:22 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
ajay wrote:
[quote]On Oct 26, 5:14 pm, ajay <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 26, 9:29 am, doug <x... at (no spam) xx.com> wrote:
ajay wrote:
On Oct 26, 4:22 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:26e25ae3-b3c7-48f4-9ded-79ac2088f30e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 25, 7:15 pm, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:24042f47-0c84-480c-9ff5-456fe39c6372 at (no spam) l31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 25, 4:28 am, tomy tomy <tomytomy... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 6:07 pm, ajay <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 5:13 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ef4961ff-3ab3-4d03-8f67-21efd534376e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 23, 8:04 pm, doug <x... at (no spam) xx.com> wrote:
ajay wrote:
On Oct 23, 8:36 am, doug <x... at (no spam) 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
[/quote]
Have you made any progress trying to understand Drakes
explanation of your mistake? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ajay... |
| Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 4:26 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 27, 4:14 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
[quote]"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:92b88413-f59b-4457-82b6-0288751f1840 at (no spam) p9g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 26, 4:22 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:26e25ae3-b3c7-48f4-9ded-79ac2088f30e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com....
On Oct 25, 7:15 pm, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:24042f47-0c84-480c-9ff5-456fe39c6372 at (no spam) l31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 25, 4:28 am, tomy tomy <tomytomy... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 6:07 pm, ajay <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 5:13 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ef4961ff-3ab3-4d03-8f67-21efd534376e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 23, 8:04 pm, doug <x... at (no spam) xx.com> wrote:
ajay wrote:
On Oct 23, 8:36 am, doug <x... at (no spam) 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.
No
He has applied Law of Conservation of energy, to NON-ISOLATED SYETEM.
No
The value of 'A' has been calculated
simply implies the condition, when LAW OF COSERVATION OF ENERGY HOLDS
good to ISOLATED SYSTEM .
Then A must be 1. Your theory is refuted.
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.
When A = 1
Recently I have replied him in 15 page reply.
Poor bastard .. you are just being a pathetic pain in the arse
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
They will all see what an idiot you are. Good.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
-------
To
INERTIAL
Let us come to point number 1.
I have written that
DRAKE has applied Law of Conservation of energy, to NON-ISOLATED
SYETEM.
I re-assert it.
You said NO
Can you justify your wrong claim defining ISOLATED SYATEM , NON-
ISOLTED SYSTEM and Law of Conservation of Energy?
Ajay Sharma www.AjayOnLine.us |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ajay... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 2:16 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 27, 7:31 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
[quote]"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:bbd4e288-8223-460c-8541-b01ce80e8a63 at (no spam) j4g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 27, 4:14 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:92b88413-f59b-4457-82b6-0288751f1840 at (no spam) p9g2000vbl.googlegroups.com....
On Oct 26, 4:22 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:26e25ae3-b3c7-48f4-9ded-79ac2088f30e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 25, 7:15 pm, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:24042f47-0c84-480c-9ff5-456fe39c6372 at (no spam) l31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 25, 4:28 am, tomy tomy <tomytomy... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 6:07 pm, ajay <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 5:13 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ef4961ff-3ab3-4d03-8f67-21efd534376e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 23, 8:04 pm, doug <x... at (no spam) xx.com> wrote:
ajay wrote:
On Oct 23, 8:36 am, doug <x... at (no spam) 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.
No
He has applied Law of Conservation of energy, to NON-ISOLATED SYETEM..
No
The value of 'A' has been calculated
simply implies the condition, when LAW OF COSERVATION OF ENERGY HOLDS
good to ISOLATED SYSTEM .
Then A must be 1. Your theory is refuted.
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.
When A = 1
Recently I have replied him in 15 page reply.
Poor bastard .. you are just being a pathetic pain in the arse
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
They will all see what an idiot you are. Good.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
-------
To
INERTIAL
Let us come to point number 1.
I have written that
DRAKE has applied Law of Conservation of energy, to NON-ISOLATED
SYETEM.
I re-assert it.
Then you are wrong twice
You said NO
And I'll say it again
Can you justify your wrong claim defining ISOLATED SYATEM , NON-
ISOLTED SYSTEM and Law of Conservation of Energy?
It is your claim that is wrong. I am not the one making claims.
Yours is wrong, as Drake clearly demonstrated. If energy is to be
conserved, A = 1, if A is not 1 then energy is not conserved.
You clearly do not understand the physics involved. Perhaps you are blinded
by your prejudices and over-inflated ego, as are most crackpots such as
yourself.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
----------
To
Inertial
Drake has applied Law of Conservation of Energy to NON-ISOLATED
SYSTEM.
The mathematical equations ALLOWS us to calculate the conditions
when system is isolated.
The system is ISOLATED when A=1,thus energy is conserved.
When (A>1, A<1) then system is NON-ISOLTED and Law of Conservation of
Energy is not applicable.
Hence in this case (A>1, A <1 , system is NON-ISOLATED ), the Law of
Conservation of
Energy is not applicable. Thus there is no possibility any conclusion
in this regard. It is simple.
AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us
Can you justify your wrong claim defining ISOLATED SYATEM , NON-
> ISOLTED SYSTEM and Law of Conservation of Energy? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ajay... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 3:01 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 27, 5:36 pm, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
[quote]"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:88e8dcd3-1fd7-4741-9d74-41d3756ca082 at (no spam) p8g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 27, 7:31 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:bbd4e288-8223-460c-8541-b01ce80e8a63 at (no spam) j4g2000yqe.googlegroups.com....
On Oct 27, 4:14 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:92b88413-f59b-4457-82b6-0288751f1840 at (no spam) p9g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 26, 4:22 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:26e25ae3-b3c7-48f4-9ded-79ac2088f30e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups..com...
On Oct 25, 7:15 pm, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:24042f47-0c84-480c-9ff5-456fe39c6372 at (no spam) l31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 25, 4:28 am, tomy tomy <tomytomy... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 6:07 pm, ajay <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 5:13 am, "Inertial" <relativ... at (no spam) rest.com> wrote:
"ajay" <ajayonline... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ef4961ff-3ab3-4d03-8f67-21efd534376e at (no spam) 33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 23, 8:04 pm, doug <x... at (no spam) xx.com> wrote:
ajay wrote:
On Oct 23, 8:36 am, doug <x... at (no spam) 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.
No
He has applied Law of Conservation of energy, to NON-ISOLATED
SYETEM.
No
The value of 'A' has been calculated
simply implies the condition, when LAW OF COSERVATION OF ENERGY
HOLDS
good to ISOLATED SYSTEM .
Then A must be 1. Your theory is refuted.
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.
When A = 1
Recently I have replied him in 15 page reply.
Poor bastard .. you are just being a pathetic pain in the arse
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
They will all see what an idiot you are. Good.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
-------
To
INERTIAL
Let us come to point number 1.
I have written that
DRAKE has applied Law of Conservation of energy, to NON-ISOLATED
SYETEM.
I re-assert it.
Then you are wrong twice
You said NO
And I'll say it again
Can you justify your wrong claim defining ISOLATED SYATEM , NON-
ISOLTED SYSTEM and Law of Conservation of Energy?
It is your claim that is wrong. I am not the one making claims.
Yours is wrong, as Drake clearly demonstrated. If energy is to be
conserved, A = 1, if A is not 1 then energy is not conserved.
You clearly do not understand the physics involved. Perhaps you are
blinded
by your prejudices and over-inflated ego, as are most crackpots such as
yourself.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
----------
To
Inertial
Drake has applied Law of Conservation of Energy to NON-ISOLATED
SYSTEM.
Nope
The mathematical equations ALLOWS us to calculate the conditions
when system is isolated.
The system is ISOLATED when A=1,thus energy is conserved.
When (A>1, A<1) then system is NON-ISOLTED and Law of Conservation of
Energy is not applicable.
So the law only applies when you want it to apply.
Hence in this case (A>1, A <1 , system is NON-ISOLATED ),
Wrong
the Law of
Conservation of
Energy is not applicable. Thus there is no possibility any conclusion
in this regard. It is simple.
Yes .. you're an annoying little idiot.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
-----
To
Inertial
The law of Conservation of Energy holds good for ISOLATED SYSTEM.
If it applied to NON-ISOLATED SYSTEM,then we can calculate the
conditions
under which it becomes ISOLATED.
AJAY SHARMA www.AjayOnLine.us |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sun Dec 06, 2009 4:12 pm
|
|