Off-topic nonsense extracted from "Developing equation for fictional force created by rotation"

I’m out of my element here. R penner would know but I haven’t seen him on in ages.

they say you can’t combine scaler and vector fields but I’m bot sure inequalities would or wouldn’t work.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I agree. If the math is impossible and it seeks to disprove anything observationally known to contain precise math it has a slim chance of ever being anything.

the only force created by rotation is momentum, yet you have me convinced your proposal creates rotation.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Or perhaps hypotheticals are impossible to create.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Who is 'we'? And you know very well there is no basis at all in assuming any such thing. I just get sick of your chip-on-the-shoulder attempts to point score when you are incapable of actually scoring any points.
Let's not play games. There has been a long history of engagements here at SF in which you have come off second best on every occasion. You deeply resent that situation. I understand that. But your attempts to 'get even' carry no water.

 

Your challenge is predicated on several assertions, which I have quoted and countered (posts 70 and 72).
If you choose not to follow-up then they remain countered.


Section II: Schoolyard Insults (not read)

:reported for trolling in Hard Science Forum:

 

Oh dear! Am I in trouble with - let me guess - your hero James R again?! 40 points racked up so far for daring to exercise actual freedom of speech. Well, shouldn't be too long to see if your petulant 'report' results in an even higher score.
Life can be hard here at SF for non PC non-conformists who have a spine stiffer than jelly. In the mean time, maybe you'd like to concentrate on dealing, as best YOU can, with Ultron's notion-not-theory!!!

 

Ok so a force that acts upon fast spinning asteroids that keeps them from flying apart…

they have the same problem with electrons which can spin very fast yet don’t fly apart either…

my suggestion… give up because normal scientists here solidly stand by known assertions and do not believe in anything new that could exist.

following that up increasing spin also increases mass which in turn increased gravity especially in a void area where you would find these asteroids and Saturn. So it is kind of the reverse of an event horizon.

 

I keep an open mind. Just not so open my critical faculties falls out.

 

You say that like it's not a good thing.
It's the job of a scientist to find evidence. They leave 'clapping your hands and believing' to the non-scientists and antiVaxxers.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

So every spot of actual and tangible evidence could not stand in the same position. And we would not learn anything from that which we don’t already know. Bah! Keep your high energy physics I’m sure it will one day come in handy for nanotechnology. Worlds smallest particle collider.

 

I see you have no wish to reject technology that came out of all this sciencing. Gonna give up your internet connection are you?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Quite the opposite.

Looking for evidence is how we find things we didn't already know.

Belief is the antithesis of looking for new things - it's what is left when we reject new evidence.

We should take this elsewhere. If you wish to further discuss belief versus analysis, we should have this moved to a more appropriate forum.

 

Ok but you start the argument and the thread

 

I can't. It's your comment about scientists; I can't formulate your complaint for you.

 

I referred to scientists on here. Not me specifically. The little click your in. The complete adherence to “the rules” of science.

I’m still a scientist. I believe in science and all that it stands for, but many have put me down.

I doubt I am misunderstood. Just giving good ideas away for free. Yet I will concede the point just give me a moment to formulate a thought that won’t get me banned for spam and cheese.

you’ll find your thread in general science and technology

 

I do not find it.

 

Ha ha ha ha. The irony here gets rich. Really rich: see e.g. #78 here, or a string of 'you can'ts' that was ended with silencing by way of shaming here:
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/in-defence-of-space-aliens.160045/page-259#post-3682782
Some just don't know when to accept they are well and truly beat, and it's way past time to quit! I guess one advantage of selectively playing nice guy is to bag a like here and there. It's a play that works.

A deep and meaningful and apt statement, or a shallow, pretentious banality? Coming from someone with demonstrably very weak math skills, imo the latter looks the better choice.

 

Don't hold it against him too much. Its me he's mad at, for eviscerating him in another thread, and he can't or won't compartmentalize his feelings here. Not cool, but not your problem.

 

Stars would stop the rapid increase in mass of black holes by consuming the matter that feeds black holes. Most quasars are near spaces that make new stars

so

Xk=(R*F*8pieG)/ c^4

where R is the vector from which the torque originates.

k is Einstein’s gravitational constant

now all it needs is to integrate friction.

 

You made that claim. I'm calling your bluff. Link to the specific post(s) in the relevant thread where I was supposedly 'eviscerated'. Or admit you are lying.

 

You know perfectly well but sure, lets give it more publicity.

Start here. Posts 4880, 4900, 4902, 4904, 4906, etc. (Just the part where you suddenly realize that you've been taking TV shows about UFOs at face-value and that the rest of the adult world is not so gullible.)

Now, take your trolling elsewhere. You will not get fed further here.