Desperate Call To Planet Earth

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by Abhi, Feb 1, 2002.

  1. Abhi Registered Member

    Messages:
    22
    My name is Abhi. I am B.Sc(Math), age 32, serving as Assistant with an insurance company in India. I believe that I have logically compatible theory regarding cause of Big-Bang, exact nature of elementary particle of our Universe, cause of mass, exact nature of Gravity and the way to unify quantum mechanics with Gravity. I believe that I can create Anti-Gravity by experiment.

    But I am surrounded by totally different, strange circumstances. I can't talk single word about science with people around me. And I don't have resources to execute my ideas in action.

    I don't want to get trapped in the world of theoretics, arguments, rhetorics. It was my endeavor to find experimental proof of my theory. Following article is, I think, simple and perfect experimental proof of my theory. I am proposing TEST experiment(15 Km long pipe) to verify truthness of my statement. Though the experiment is simple, as I said above, unfortunately, I don't have resources to carry out this experiment.

    My desperate call to all the mankind on Planet Earth is to help me in this human endeavor. You can help me in two ways.

    (1) If such test experiment is already carried out sometime in history, I request you to inform me when, who, how, where and what was the result.
    (2) If such test experiment is not carried out any time in history, I request some one of you to please come forward and please carry out such test experiment for the sake of better understanding of our universe and better future for mankind.

    Please note that I am talking about TEST EXPERIMENT in which I have given length of pipe as 15 Km.

    Hope that someone out there will hear my desperate call.

    Thank You Very Much.

    Sincerely,
    Abhi.


    TIME VS ENERGY
    Mr. Abhijit B Patil, C/o Life Insurance Corporation of India, At/Po/Tq: Shahada City,
    Dist: Nandurbar, Maharastra State, INDIA. Pin: 425 409. E-Mail Address: xabhix@hotmail.com


    Abstract:

    Physics states that information regarding flow of water travel in water with speed equal to speed of sound in water. This Article aims to prove that this is not true.

    Introduction:

    When we open valve of garden hose, with the hose full of water, water flows out. Physics state that this information regarding flow of water travels back with speed of sound, through pressure waves, and reaches to water level in reservoir. Only after that, water level comes down. I am giving below my experiment which intends to explain that, if this is true i.e. if there is really speed limit, then we can "use" it and "create free potential energy". Obviously, this is against law of conservation of energy which states that "energy can neither be created nor destroyed".

    One thing to be remembered in this experiment is that I am NOT arguing about speed of sound in water. I perfectly agree with speed of sound and the way in which sound waves travel in water.

    Experiment:

    Consider a circular water reservoir of radius 1000 meter and depth 10 meter fully filled with water. Pipe of cross sectional radius 3 centimeter is attached to bottom of reservoir. Let length of this pipe be 3 million km and arranged in horizontal, spiral structure on ground so that water reservoir is near our left hand and open end "B" of pipe, with valve, is near our right hand touched to ground. (End "A" at left hand is attached to bottom of water reservoir and end "B" is near our right hand). The entire horizontal 3 million Km long pipe on ground is full of water.

    Action I:

    Let us open the valve at end "B" so that, due to pressure difference, water begins to flow out of end "B" on ground with speed 10 m/s(for example only. In fact, if pipe is not connected at end "A", according to equations speed of water will be 14 m/s. But we are considering friction of water with pipe. Hence speed of water will decrease. Reader should note that we are not going to change length of pipe in our experiment. So friction will be constant throughout experiment). According to Physics, this "information" regarding flow of water from end "B" will travel back across the full length of pipe i.e. 3 million Km with speed of sound. Speed of sound in water is 1482 m/s. So it will take about 2,024,291 seconds i.e. 23 days 10 hours 18 minutes and 11 seconds to reach this "information" to water level in reservoir and only after that water level in reservoir will come down. After such a long time, there will be steady, uniform flow of water in pipe.


    Action II:

    Now there is steady flow of water in pipe. According to equation of continuity, as cross sectional area of pipe throughout 3 million Km is uniform, speed and volume of water entering the pipe from reservoir at end "A" is exactly equal to speed and volume of water leaving the pipe at end "B". Let us lift the last 100 meter segment of hose pipe at end "B" straight up in vertical direction pointing towards sky. Remember, we are lifting only last 100 meter segment of pipe. NOT ENTIRE PIPE. Now height of water column in reservoir is 10 meter and at end "B", in vertical hose pipe is 100 meter.

    Obviously, water pressure in 100 meter vertical pipe is greater than that in reservoir. So to maintain equilibrium, water should flow from end "B" to end "A" i.e. reservoir. But problem is that how the water in reservoir will come to "know" that we have changed situation at end "B" and water pressure at end "B" is greater so that it should stop flow of water towards end "B" and allow water from vertical pipe i.e. end "B" to flow towards reservoir to maintain equilibrium. Because established knowledge of physics says that this "information" regarding change in pressure at end "B" will travel back towards reservoir with speed equal to speed of sound in water.

    So it will take 23 days, 10 hours, 18 minutes and 11 seconds for this "information" to reach to water reservoir. As water in reservoir has no "information" what we have done at end "B" during this time, it will continue to flow as if nothing is happened!. According to equation of continuity, same volume of water which left reservoir will continue to flow through hose pipe at end "B" 90 meter above level of water in reservoir! And it will continue to flow for 23 days, 10 hours, 18 minutes and 11 seconds!

    Please note, during these 23 days and 10 hours, end "B" is at 90 meter higher level than water level in reservoir. But still, due to extremely slow speed of "information transfer" regarding change in situation i.e. water pressure at end "B", Water in reservoir simply don't "know" that water pressure at end "B" is changed and water flow is directed in vertical direction! Hence water will continue to flow at height 90 meter above the water level in reservoir without any energy! This defies gravity. And we can calculate the tremendous amount of water which will flow at higher level during these 23 days, 10 hours, 18 minutes and 11 seconds(57206 cubic meter, in our experiment).

    Can it really happen?
    We know, only one answer: YES or NO.

    (1) If YES, then in this way, we can lift water from oceans to higher level in dams without spending any energy at all. And we can use it in hydroelectric power plants to generate power. Better to shut down all the thermal and nuclear power plants on earth. We don't need them. Because we will have never ending source of "free energy". This is completely against law of conservation of energy and totally illogical, inconceivable. I DON'T agree with this result.

    (2) If NO, then it means flow of water stopped at exactly same moment when we lifted hose pipe above level of water in reservoir. In another word, information regarding change in situation at end "B" reached to water level in reservoir at exactly same moment!


    Discussion:

    If we say that YES!, the water will continue to flow 90 meter above level of water in reservoir! That is because just before we changed situation at end "B", the water in horizontal pipe all over 3 million km length of pipe has gained momentum. And this momentum will supply energy to water to enable it to flow 90 meter above the water level in reservoir for 23 days, 10 hours, 18 minutes and 11 seconds! We may think that no law is violated. But we ignores completely that at the end of 23 days, 10 hours, 18 minutes, 11 seconds, we have tremendous amount of water at height 100 meter which was initially at 10 meter only and we have spent negligible energy.

    In reality, momentum of water can never be so large to enable it to flow above water level in reservoir. In daily life, we have seen that when the opening end of pipe is at the bottom or below the bottom of reservoir in our homes, water comes out with tremendous speed(depending upon volume and height of water column in reservoir). So we may think that with such speed it can easily flow "above" water level in reservoir. But NO. It does not happen. We should also concentrate on example of Roller Coaster. In Roller Coaster, we come down towards earth with enormous speed due to gravity(depending upon height). But that speed can never throw us "above" the point from where we begin to come down. Most simple example is of pendulum. Potential energy (PE) of any body must be exactly equal to kinetic energy (KE) and at any point of time PE + KE must be constant.

    The gravitational potential energy associated with particle-earth system depends only on vertical position or height of the particle. Equation of potential energy is PE = mgh. Let here mass of water flown at 100 meter height be "m" Kg. So reader should note that when the water was in reservoir, at 10 meter height, its PE was “10mg” and after 23 days 10 hours, when it is at 100 meter height, its PE will be “100mg”. Hence it has gained “90mg” PE. And we have spent negligible energy to lift the pipe at end "B" in few seconds(It is not destroyed or wasted. It is stored as PE in vertical pipe and in water in that vertical pipe). We should concentrate on this possibility. Where from that "extra 90mg” came? We can use this "extra" PE to create "extra" power in hydroelectric power plants.

    Please note that, I have given 100 meter height for example only. We can increase the height to extent we want(I mean it). And we can "create" tremendous, tremendous "free" potential energy. We came across situation when water which will flow at sufficiently high level above water level in reservoir, will have potential energy many time greater than all the water in entire reservoir! For example, if in our experiment, height of vertical pipe is 6000 meter, then 57206 cubic meter water will have potential energy greater than all the water in entire reservoir and pipe! If our treatment of momentum is true, then water in 3 million Km long pipe should have enough momentum to push the water at 6000 meter.

    Reader might say that if we increase height, for example from 100 meter to 1000 meter, there will be high pressure in vertical pipe near ground(97,80,400 Pa) compared to that in reservoir(97804 Pa). Yes, certainly there will be. But BASIC question I am asking, how water in reservoir will come to know about this pressure? Why should it stop flow if according to physics, it will realise about change in situation at end "B" only after 20,24,291 seconds? And if it does not stop flow, where the water, which is flowing in pipe, will go?


    Consider that we have decided to carry out Action II when there was very liitle water, for example, less than 57206 cubic meter, in reservoir. So, when these pressure waves reaches to reservoir after 23 days, 10 hours, 18 minutes and 11 seconds, last drop of water has entered in pipe. There is no water at all in reservoir. What these pressure waves will do?

    We might think that when we lift end “B” of hose, flow from end “B” will stop exactly same moment it reaches “water level in reservoir”, but water flow from reservoir will not stop. It will flow in pipe. Question remains, where this water will go? Remember we are talking here about 57206 cubic meter water. Total volume of water in 3 million long pipe with 3 centimeter inner radius will be 2826000 cubic meter. Hence we are talking about 2 % of total volume of water in pipe. Can water in pipe be compressed by 2%? What is the reason? Only because we lifted pipe at end "B" to about 10 meter of height? Why this "compressing water" in pipe, should not push water in pipe at end "B" in vertical direction? And if height of water reservoir is greater, speed of water flowing in pipe will be more. Hence this percentage of volume flowing in pipe will increase. Another thing, if this is to be the case then water level in reservoir is coming down, it is changing. Think that we are taking out or adding large amount of water from/to reservoir. So at which water level in reservoir, flow from end “B” will stop? How the water at end “B” will come to “know” about exact level of water in reservoir, if water is still flowing from reservoir to end “B”? Which reservoir level we are talking about when we lift pipe at end "B"?

    We are concentrating on speed of sound in water only because physics tells us that information transfer takes place in water with this speed. In fact even if we assume that information transfer in water takes place with speed of light, it does not affect our experiment in any way. Only thing we will have to do is to increase length of pipe for better understanding. For better understanding, we can use rigid pipe of 1 meter diameter of 3 million Km(or more) length and at end "B", we can attach our 100 meter vertical hose pipe of 3 centimeter radius. Equation of continuity will do its work. But, the moment we begin to apply speed of light to flow of water, we “assumed” that established knowledge of physics is wrong.

    We might say that water will not flow at all in such long pipe, but we should concentrate that in other words we are saying that water in pipe will turn in moleculear structure like that of metal. And we will have to explain, how can this happen. Water flows because of pressure difference and because it can not withstand shearing stress. How can water in pipe at end"B", when it is on ground, in Action I, sustain shearing stress and molecules of water just stick with each other and pipe? It must flow. If reader has difficulty, I request reader to consider Three Gorges Dam (China) or in extreme case, entire Ocean as reservoir in my experiment.


    Test Experiment:

    It is no denying fact that it is almost impossible for us to arrange such 3 million Km long pipe to verify the truthness of this experiment. But certainly we can do test experiment with just 15 Km long pipe. In fact, I think, in any city, underground water supply network is longer than 15 Km. If "information" regarding change in water pressure really travels with speed of sound in water, then it will take at least 10 seconds to reach state of equilibrium. We can lift other end "B" to just few centimeter above water level in reservoir. During these 10 seconds water will continue to flow "above" water level in reservoir(according to physics). If this happens, then certainly it is against law of conservation of energy.

    Most important question is that has ever scientists "seen" with their own eyes that in test experiment like I am proposing(15 Km long pipe), water flows out of end "B" at heigher level or not? If established knowledge of physics is correct i.e. this "information" travel with speed of sound in water (1482 m/s), then we can use only 15 Km long pipe to see it with "our own eyes". Has ever scientists performed such experiment? I agree, neither I have performed such experiment. But doesn't it lead to raise suspicion about current knowledge of physics regarding information transfer if no one on planet earth has experimentally verified it? And we know, certainly we will not need million dollar budget to buy 15 km long pipe and perform such test experiment.

    In fact, we don't need to buy any pipe at all. There are lot of pipe lines on earth which run over hundreds of Km, from one city to other city, from dam to city. We need to just attach hose pipe to such pipe in which water is flowing and lift this hose above water level in reservoir or dam. If such experiment is already done somewhere, I request reader to inform me on my e-mail or postal address. If such experiment is not done at any time in history, then I wonder, how can we assume that information transfer in water take place with speed of sound.

    Conclusion:

    We should come to the conclusion that when we lift pipe in Action II, the flow of water must stop at exactly same moment it reaches level of water in reservoir. Whatever may be length of pipe, it does not matter. Even if single drop of water flow above water level in reservoir without energy, law of conservation of energy collapse. If there is really speed limit for information transfer in this specific experiment, we can "use" it in this way to gain "free energy". But I DO NOT predict such result. I strongly believe that there is NOT any "free energy" in our universe. So information regarding pressure change of water at end points of system must travel at exactly same moment.

    References:
    [1] Halliday / Resnick / Walker: Fundamentals of Physics, Sixth Edition.

    Author And Material Request To:
    Mr. Abhijit B Patil, C/o Life Insurance Corporation of India, At/Po/Tq: Shahada City,
    Dist: Nandurbar, Maharastra State, INDIA. Pin: 425 409. E-Mail Address: xabhix@hotmail.com

    Please Remember,

    My desperate call to all the mankind on Planet Earth is to help me in this human endeavor. You can help me in two ways.

    (1) If such test experiment is already carried out sometime in history, I request you to inform me when, who, how, where and what was the result.
    (2) If such test experiment is not carried out any time in history, I request some one of you to please come forward and please carry out such test experiment for the sake of better understanding of our universe and better future for mankind.

    Please note that I am talking about TEST EXPERIMENT in which I have given length of pipe as 15 Km.

    Hope that someone out there will hear my desperate call.

    Thank You Very Much.

    Sincerely,
    Abhi.
     
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2002
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. goofyfish Analog By Birth, Digital By Design Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,331
    Um, I thought they addressed your experiment rather well in January when you posed the same idea in PhysicsFORUMS.com. Was there a particular response from there that you needed someone to expand on?

    (Flamethrower, do you want to jump in here?)

    Peace.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Abhi Registered Member

    Messages:
    22
    I strongly believe that moderator should supervise discussion on message board and not take part in it. On PhysicsForums, moderator, Integral, began to reply me. He lost his composure when I began to oppose his reply. I think, this is normal in any discussion. If there is no one to oppose to no one, how can discussion take place? But Integral used threatening language. You can go there and see his last reply. So I left that forum.

    In physics forum or any other forum, through e-mails, I am NOT receiving unanimous reply.

    I request you to go through my post again and read carefully. I have answered the possibility if someone think that water can flow above water level in reservoir.

    Still we can go arguing and there will be no result. Hence I think, we should come to reality.

    Please answer my desperate call.

    Thanks.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,855
    Abhi

    http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?threadid=5508

    You've already presented your argument. Spamming the board will not help you any further. You need to understand physics and relativity before making claims which attempt to denounce them.

    So information regarding pressure change of water at end points of system must travel at exactly same moment... I intend to prove that in these experiments, information transfer takes place at exactly same moment irrespective of distance between end points through another property of matter...If such experiment is not done at any time in history, then I wonder, how can we assume that information transfer in water take place with speed of sound.
     
  8. Abhi Registered Member

    Messages:
    22
    Sorry for mistake. I thought that I can't edit post. Now I have edited that post so that this can be only one in this forum.

    I don't have much knowledge of physics, I agree. But I request you to post your reply. Thanks.
     
  9. ImaHamster2 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    220
    Goofyfish, thank you for posting the link to the PhysicForum discussion.

    This hamster read through the discussion and agrees with Abhi that the moderator on that forum abused his authority. Abhi rightly objected to the moderator’s “argument” that Abhi should “study hydraulics”. The moderator failed to provide equations or links to equations that Abhi could then refute. Others on the thread found Abhi’s experiment interesting and non-trivial.

    Abhi has modified his proposed experiment to address “criticisms” discussed on the PhysicForum discussion. From this hamster’s view he is proceeding in a reasonable manner.


    This hamster’s own guess is that a combination of factors is working to prevent a flow of water that breaks the Law of Conservation of Energy. Water compressibility, water momentum, and pipe expansion (potentially even pipe bursting due to excessive pressure) possibly prevent the scenario. However this hamster is not prepared to back those guesses up with equations. (Abhi appears to have considered these possibilities.)

    Even if this hamster did provide a mathematical explanation, Abhi would still being doing good science to ask for experimental verification. Determining what does happen instead of what might happen is good science.
     
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2002
  10. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,855
    Abhi

    I don't have much knowledge of physics, I agree.

    Then how is it possible that you are able to make these claims:

    I believe that I have logically compatible theory regarding cause of Big-Bang, exact nature of elementary particle of our Universe, cause of mass, exact nature of Gravity and the way to unify quantum mechanics with Gravity. I believe that I can create Anti-Gravity by experiment.

    Scientists that *do* have knowledge of physics, as well as a number of other fields related to this subject, are not able to make the same claims. Those that do so are considered crackpots. And rightly so. Their claims usually fall to pieces from the get go. As do yours. You can't be serious in trying to make us believe that an insurance assistant with no knowledge of even the basics of scientific method, is going to solve the Theory of Everything. You insult our intelligence.

    Create anti-gravity? Give me a break. Anti-gravity is science fiction.
     
  11. ImaHamster2 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    220
    Q, if one gets past Abhi’s introduction, his experiment is reasonable and interesting. This hamster suspects his model does conform to the physics in “Halliday / Resnick / Walker: Fundamentals of Physics” which this hamster remembers as being the standard physics text at MIT for some years.

    Physics in college texts has limitations that are seldom explained to students. Abhi’s exploration will help show why and where more sophisticated models are needed. Abhi might well discover no existing physics model covers his exact scenario.

    It could well be that the level of physics sophistication needed to explain Abhi’s experiment is beyond what may be discussed on this forum. (As for example, proving pi is irrational or perhaps ergodic is beyond this forum.) If so Abhi should be told this and not be disparaged for asking a reasonable question.

    So far the “scientists” that have responded to Abhi’s requests for help have not shown the “errors” in his reasoning. Nor have they provided equations or references that might guide Abhi in his explorations.

    “You can't be serious in trying to make us believe that an insurance assistant with no knowledge of even the basics of scientific method, is going to solve the Theory of Everything.”

    From this hamster’s observation Abhi does show comprehension of basic physics and the need for experimentation to confirm theory. This hamster also seems to remember a certain patent clerk…
     
  12. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,855
    This hamster also seems to remember a certain patent clerk…

    I was wondering how quickly someone was going to point that out. Of course, the comparison is completely absurd.

    btw, it is not the 'scientists' that are obliged to do anything to help abhi in his quest.

    As you say, let's get past his opening remarks. How about this claim:

    Physics states that information regarding flow of water travel in water with speed equal to speed of sound in water. This Article aims to prove that this is not true.

    ..followed by this remark:

    One thing to be remembered in this experiment is that I am NOT arguing about speed of sound in water. I perfectly agree with speed of sound and the way in which sound waves travel in water.

    His conclusions are pure nonsense:

    Can it really happen?
    We know, only one answer: YES or NO.

    (1) If YES, then in this way, we can lift water from oceans to higher level in dams without spending any energy at all. And we can use it in hydroelectric power plants to generate power. Better to shut down all the thermal and nuclear power plants on earth. We don't need them. Because we will have never ending source of "free energy". This is completely against law of conservation of energy and totally illogical, inconceivable. I DON'T agree with this result.

    (2) If NO, then it means flow of water stopped at exactly same moment when we lifted hose pipe above level of water in reservoir. In another word, information regarding change in situation at end "B" reached to water level in reservoir at exactly same moment!


    It's difficult to discuss this any further because as I stated previously, his claims fall apart from the get go. He simply doesn't understand the physics. And after reading through the link posted earlier, others have tried to explain the flaws in his theory, but he didn't understand them either. Hence the moderators moves.
     
  13. Mr. G reality.sys Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,191
    It's easier to speculate on the true nature of 3rd-person hampsters than the nature of insurance scientists.
     
  14. ImaHamster2 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    220
    Q, as this hamster remembers the discussion (unable to access the site to check tonight) Abhi explained his reasoning and further explained that he understood that signal transfer faster than the speed of sound through water or continuing flow of water from the raised pipe both contradicted facts he’d learned from physics. He reasonably asked what was wrong with his understanding.

    One poster proposed capillary action as an explanation. Another poster focused on “frictional” forces largely due to the small pipe cross section. Abhi increased the diameter of his proposed pipe to address both issues. Another suggested fluid momentum played a significant role. Abhi listened to explanations and replied reasonably. From this hamster’s observation none of the posters explained why Abhi’s experiment would fail.

    (In this hamster’s opinion the likely explanation involves pipe expansion, fluid compressibility, and pressure shock waves. A highly compressed fluid should transmit a shock wave far faster then the normal speed of sound in water, a possibility that no one on the physics forum noted.

    This hamster guesses that as the pipe is lifted a reverse pressure shock wave builds and travels sufficiently fast that pipe expansion and fluid compressibility account for fluid accumulated until the shock wave reaches the faucet and stops the water inflow. That is, if the pressure doesn't burst the pipe.

    Abhi’s statement that “Physics states that information regarding flow of water travel in water with speed equal to speed of sound in water. This Article aims to prove that this is not true.” seems reasonable given that he seems unaware that sound speed changes with water pressure.

    This hamster suspects the mathematics and physics models needed to simulate Abhi’s experiment don’t exist. Fluid models often assume incompressible fluids and/or laminar flow.)

    The moderator declared that Abhi should study hydraulics and ended a discussion that several people found sufficiently interesting to offer suggestions. Abhi remained reasonable and polite throughout the discussion.

    Scientists aren’t obligated to help Abhi or any person. No one forced anyone to reply to his post. This hamster does understand the need to keep a physics forum at a certain level of expertise. That might explain the moderator’s action. That does not mean that Abhi’s questions are not reasonable at this forum.

    Does this hamster think Abhi has discovered an endless supply of energy or is the next Einstein? No. He does seem intelligent and determined and willing to challenge existing dogma. Those seem excellent qualities for any scientist.
     
  15. Abhi Registered Member

    Messages:
    22


    Thanks. But I would like to know which "flaws" they have explained. And how can it be called "flaw" if no one is backing their arguments by some reference? And above all, how can I understand if I am receiving different reply from one another?

    Please give me some reference. When, where, who, how it has been experimentally verified. I promise you, I will give up my whole theory regarding origin of universe and do my job of insurance.

    Thank you very much.
     
  16. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,855
    The Hampster

    The Hampster appears to be quite taken with Abhi's theories. The Hampster goes to lengths defending said theories. The Hampster should therefore take the initiative to address the concerns of our budding scientist rather than running in place on his Hampsters whirligig.

    Please be sure the Hampster provides all calculations for verification. Hampster diagrams are also acceptable.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  17. tetra Hello Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    144
    Q, what the hell is your problem?
    Before you declare his entire theory wrong, prove it wrong.
    The man is OBVIOUSLY from India, you can't expect his English to be perfect, so stop attacking his sentence structure. This isn't a paper-writing or grammar forums.

    This is a science forums, and we don't violently attack somebody because they have an idea. Get your act together.

    If you know that he is wrong, give him a reason so that he can understand.
    You don't correct a 5th grader's math paper by hitting him with a baseball bat. geez.
     
  18. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,855
    Tetra

    Q, what the hell is your problem?

    Lack of empathy.

    Before you declare his entire theory wrong, prove it wrong.

    You haven't been following along, have you?

    The man is OBVIOUSLY from India, you can't expect his English to be perfect, so stop attacking his sentence structure. This isn't a paper-writing or grammar forums.

    Who said anything about syntax? Are you sure you've read this thread?

    This is a science forums, and we don't violently attack somebody because they have an idea. Get your act together.

    At this point I'm going to assume you're having a bad hair day. That, or you're holding a grudge against the (Q). Either way your response is typical of a rant. So sit back, take a deep breath, and have a nice day! The (Q) luvs ya!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  19. tetra Hello Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    144
    There is nothing in this thread with evidence against Abhi, only ridicule.

    You did, in the post before Mr. G's post.

    I'm not alone when I say it is very rude to agressively attack everybody with an idea. You seem like the run of the mill message board troll, you really should direct that aggression at something constructive.

    If you have actual factual evidence to prove him wrong, I am willing to change my opinion of you.
     
  20. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,855
    If you have actual factual evidence to prove him wrong, I am willing to change my opinion of you.

    It is observed empirical evidence that Abhi is attempting to denounce. The same observed empirical evidence that he doesn't understand. Aside from the delusion that your opinion of me is somehow my concern, your understanding of the situation is lacking as well. Some clarification is in order.

    Physics and music share an interesting relationship. They are structured such that one, willing to learn the 'language' necessary to communicate the expressions held within, may understand what another is attempting to describe. You and I may speak a different language in the vernacular, but if you write a musical piece or a mathematical equation, I am quite able to play the music or make a calculation. Notation is to music as math is to physics. They are the vehicles used to explain the theories.

    Therefore one must speak the language of mathematics in order to understand the theories of physics. Physics and mathematics are not separable. If one cannot present the theory in mathematical terms, then one has absolutely nothing to say.

    Kapeesh?
     
  21. ImaHamster2 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    220
    Abhi, this hamster guesses that the reason that you are getting different answers from different people is that no one knows exactly what would happen in your experiment. Several people have experience with pipe systems that lead them to suggest possible answers. None of the posters has done precisely the experiment you are suggesting.

    This hamster suggests searching the Internet for information on the speed of sound at ocean depths. There should be some research involving submarines and sonar. That’s only a start. The experiment you propose is not at all simple to model.

    This hamster suggests researching Navier-Stokes equations. They won’t work for your problem but they are a good starting point for understanding the difficulty of the physics underlying your experiment.

    http://www.efunda.com/formulae/fluids/navier_stokes.cfm
     
  22. tetra Hello Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    144
    and this observed empirical evidence is?

    OK, interesting. This however has nothing to do with the experiment proposed by Abhi. If you are simply trying to insult my ability to understand math and physics, you are mistaken. You are correct in thinking that there is some clarification in order.

    And by that logic, you have nothing factual against Abhi's theory because you do not understand the mathematics involved.
     
  23. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,855
    and this observed empirical evidence is?

    Surely you jest. You're asking me to provide evidence against these claims? Where've you been hiding?

    1)logically compatible theory regarding cause of Big-Bang
    2)exact nature of elementary particle of our Universe
    3)cause of mass
    4)exact nature of Gravity
    5)the way to unify quantum mechanics with Gravity.
    6)I believe that I can create Anti-Gravity by experiment.

    This however has nothing to do with the experiment proposed by Abhi. If you are simply trying to insult my ability to understand math and physics, you are mistaken.

    Why would you think I'm insulting you? I don't know anything about you. Nor care to for that matter.

    And by that logic, you have nothing factual against Abhi's theory because you do not understand the mathematics involved.

    Hehe...how presumptuous of you? That statement, along with several others, clearly show that you're not interested in anything except picking a fight, starting a flame war, or both. Sorry, not interested. The kindergarten is down the hall to the left.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page