Infinte kinetic energy

[selden]

HP,

Age does generally tend to suggest how much exposure you're likely to have had to scientific concepts.

One doesn't expect young teens to have had much education about the math of general relativity, for example.

People who have done their homework tend to be less tolerant of the flights of imagination of adults who haven't taken the time to investigate the work that has been done by thousands of people to understand the topic being discussed, whatever topic that might be.

[t00fri]

would it matter if im under twenty years old? Age does not judge intelligence. of course, i am a stupid idiot who just wishes to be at least half as smart as the people around me

Yes it would matter. Certainly it's not at all related to intelligence (at this point at least).

If you were very young, one might easier understand the style in which you presented your ideas so far...Physics is a pretty difficult subject and naturally requires quite a bit of training for making significant contributions. Like for any other profession, besides intelligence there are many things one simply HAS to know. Absorbing these takes time. Physicists are at least 26-27 years old before they get their PhD and thus have earned their "ticket" for doing research...Despite being a genius, also Einstein had to learn the basics, pass examinations and write a PhD thesis...

Young people have had much less time of understanding the general framework in which a sensible scientific discussion has to move along. That's why your age matters...


Bye Fridger

[Malenfant]

In scientific discussion it is considered extremely bad practice to make statements in a style that pretends understanding and authority, while in reality the presented arguments have just been (rather blindly) picked up from some unrecoverable source...

Bingo.

HP, had you posted something that said "I heard somewhere that a ball would bounce forever in space (or whatever) - is this true?" then people would have responded much more favourably to you (by saying "no, it's not true" and explaining why not).

But instead you started 'authoritatively', by saying that it was true (when it wasn't) and it's very obvious that you don't understand basic physics. You're clearly in no position to make such 'definitive' statements.

This isn't a forum for 'quackery', as Spiff put it. We're not interested in peoples' wacky ideas about how the universe really formed, or unsupported statements about how science works, or conspiracy theories about NASA coverups, or anything else like that.

If you want to learn about physics or astronomy then that's great. But you're not going to learn anything by saying "I heard this somewhere and it's true" when people who know better than you say it isn't. A lot of the regulars here are experienced scientists - listen to what they say and learn.

[BrainDead]

It is true that one form of energy can convert IN PRINCIPLE into another one. But this works only in a very restricted manner and usually the conversion efficiency is very small.

1. Kinetic energy converts quite well into heat energy, as we know from extensively using the break[sic] in our cars to "annihilate" our excessive kinetic energy...

Well now, that explanation was interesting. Thanks for the elementary
explanations Good Doctor. I understood what you were saying, and I even
learned something from your brief, 5-point listing. This is good.

By the way, if you'll pardon a semantic correction, a "break" in the
English-speaking world refers to something which has been broken. If
you're talking about stopping your car, I believe you'd want to use the
"brake."

Sorry, no criticism intended. I know that you already speak about four
languages, but this is probably just one of those "Americanisms" that
you might not know about.

Take care, and THANKS for the explanations.

[t00fri]

Hey Bob,

thanks a lot for the "brake" and the rest

There are just a few words that I do get wrong randomly, although I know in principle what I should write.

Another chronical case is : remainder, reminder , raise rise ...

Cheers,
Bye Fridger

[WildMoon]

For there being so many people from different countries I think they all speak English very well. Besides, every time I see a misspelled word I just read it as it was meant to be spelled and keep reading and not notice it's misspelled. Hmmm, I didn't type that sentence very good did I?

It may be that I'm a nice guy, but I'm ok with Hunter Parasite's way of trying to gather information. The way he typed what he did seemed a bit obvious to me that he was saying what he did because he knew that someone (most likely t00fri ) would come and correct his statement if it needed correcting. Of course, like was said he could've asked if it was right but maybe he thought it would've sounded weird the way it would've ended up sticking a question in there. Thus he just put it there without a question.

Sorry if anything in my post sounds rude. I guess it just seems alot of posts sound rude when they're really not meant to be because you can't see and hear the person.

[Hunter Parasite]

In scientific discussion it is considered extremely bad practice to make statements in a style that pretends understanding and authority, while in reality the presented arguments have just been (rather blindly) picked up from some unrecoverable source...

Bingo.

HP, had you posted something that said "I heard somewhere that a ball would bounce forever in space (or whatever) - is this true?" then people would have responded much more favourably to you (by saying "no, it's not true" and explaining why not).

But instead you started 'authoritatively', by saying that it was true (when it wasn't) and it's very obvious that you don't understand basic physics. You're clearly in no position to make such 'definitive' statements.

This isn't a forum for 'quackery', as Spiff put it. We're not interested in peoples' wacky ideas about how the universe really formed, or unsupported statements about how science works, or conspiracy theories about NASA coverups, or anything else like that.

If you want to learn about physics or astronomy then that's great. But you're not going to learn anything by saying "I heard this somewhere and it's true" when people who know better than you say it isn't. A lot of the regulars here are experienced scientists - listen to what they say and learn.

I am just saying what I have seen and heard and by seen I mean TV internet etc. and that it has infact been proven by those who posess the knowledge.

[Malenfant]

I am just saying what I have seen and heard and by seen I mean TV internet etc. and that it has infact been proven by those who posess the knowledge.

Well, it hasn't. Whatever you saw or read was wrong. Do you have a link to whatever it is you're claiming is true?

[Hunter Parasite]

I am just saying what I have seen and heard and by seen I mean TV internet etc. and that it has infact been proven by those who posess the knowledge.

Well, it hasn't. Whatever you saw or read was wrong. Do you have a link to whatever it is you're claiming is true?

I have no links for the information about the kintetic energy thing was on the discovery channel and i was reffering to all my theorys and such. I have a tendincy to be vague. I spell alot of things wrong too.

[buggs_moran]

My two cents, please feel free to ignore it...

Not everyone is an expert on astronomy or physics, and insulting noobs doesn't really present the community in such a great light...

One can correct and teach without being rude about it... try something more like "Actually, that's not quite correct, let me try to explain it... *explanation here*."

Less bad energy that way.

Non-experts usually realize themselves that they are non-experts..

Bye Fridger

I sure realize that I am a non expert, even with an aerospace engineering degree, decades of work, and years of teaching there is always something new to learn. There are people here that are light years ahead of most of us in astrophysics, science, modeling, you name the discipline, it is here... All you need to realize in the future Hunter, is that when you see or learn something extraordinary, question it first, learn more about it, then pose a statement or question. Reguritating what one source said is a dangerous game. (hint: that's why teachers want many sources for papers you write, not just something copied and pasted from the internet or from an encyclopedia.)

[Malenfant]

I have no links for the information about the kintetic energy thing was on the discovery channel and i was reffering to all my theorys and such. I have a tendincy to be vague. I spell alot of things wrong too.

Being "vague" won't help you at all here. You need to cite sources for such wild claims, otherwise there's no reason to take them seriously (and by association not take you seriously either since you seem to believe them without question).

Too many people on the net seem to shrug and not care about spelling nowadays (personally I think their school teachers should be throttled for not maintaining decent standards of english use), and it is important in the long run - for example, you're not going to impress anyone if you're applying for a job and your resume is full of grammar and spelling errors.
It wouldn't kill you (or anyone) to make an effort to get it right - otherwise if you don't care enough to communicate properly with people then why should we read what you have to say? Your location is in the US, you have no excuse like "English is my second language" to hide behind here.

(BTW, it should be "kinetic" not "kintetic", "theories" not "theorys", "referring" not "reffering", "tendency" not "tendincy", "theory" not "theorie"...)

[Michael Kilderry]

Too many people on the net seem to shrug and not care about spelling nowadays (personally I think their school teachers should be throttled for not maintaining decent standards of english use), and it is important in the long run - for example, you're not going to impress anyone if you're applying for a job and your resume is full of grammar and spelling errors.
It wouldn't kill you (or anyone) to make an effort to get it right - otherwise if you don't care enough to communicate properly with people then why should we read what you have to say? Your location is in the US, you have no excuse like "English is my second language" to hide behind here.

(BTW, it should be "kinetic" not "kintetic", "theories" not "theorys", "referring" not "reffering", "tendency" not "tendincy", "theory" not "theorie"...)

Well, internet forums in general are known to be a place where people often don't use their best grammar and spelling. Often people just shorten things, like changing you to u and later to l8r etc, but it doesn't mean they can't spell.

I myself have made a mistake every now and then, like writing "brung out" instead of "brought out" and "seperate" instead of "separate" and "Marsian" instead of "Martian"...

[Malenfant]

Well, internet forums in general are known to be a place where people often don't use their best grammar and spelling. Often people just shorten things, like changing you to u and later to l8r etc, but it doesn't mean they can't spell.

I myself have made a mistake every now and then, like writing "brung out" instead of "brought out" and "seperate" instead of "separate" and "Marsian" instead of "Martian"...

The odd typo I can tolerate (I make them myself while I'm typing, but usually I spot them and correct them). I'm leery about some of the shortenings (like "m8", "cya","l8r", 'how r u' instead of 'how are you'), and I can't stand "leetspeak" at all, but I'm OK with the usual internet acronyms like IMO, ISTR, IIRC etc, and verbal colloquialisms like "sorta" or "kinda".

It's the habitual mis-spellings and lack of effort backed up with an excuse of "well, it's the internet, not a formal letter" that annoy me. This is a written medium of communication after all - the only way to present yourself here is through the written word, and not making an effort to use correct spellings in your native version of English just smacks of laziness and a lack of respect for anyone reading it. It doesn't leave a good impression with the reader.

There's no excuse for it, IMO. If you can't be bothered to check the text yourself then at least copy it into a word processor and run a spellchecker on it there. That's surely not too much to ask, is it?

[t00fri]

I completely agree with Malenfant here. There is really NO good argument why internet posting should be done in a most superficial manner. It would just mean that whatever people are posting there, doesn't have any more serious character whatsoever. I rather believe many people participate in too much forum bla bla and hence don't want to loose too much time with each individual post .

I for one don't take the content of a post seriously if it is full of spelling errors and written by a person whose mothertongue is English....

Clearly there are also different possibilities for bad writing like e.g. Legastheny. One should always take such reasons into account in principle.

Bye Fridger

[Andy74]

I rather believe many people participate in too much forum bla bla and hence don't want to loose too much time with each individual post .

... don't want to lose ...

Sorry, just to correct the spelling ...

Andy

[t00fri]

I rather believe many people participate in too much forum bla bla and hence don't want to loose too much time with each individual post .

... don't want to lose ...

Sorry, just to correct the spelling ...

Andy

Yes but in German I would have written it correctly. You bet!

Bye Fridger

[Spaceman Spiff]

You wouldn't believe the number of native English speakers at ESOC and EUMETSAT who write 'loose' instead of 'lose' in their e-mails and never know it's wrong! What chance do foreigners have?

Spiff.

[t00fri]

You wouldn't believe the number of native English speakers at ESOC and EUMETSAT who write 'loose' instead of 'lose' in their e-mails and never know it's wrong! What chance do foreigners have?

Spiff.

I actually DO know how it's correctly written, but it is one of my "weak spots", notably if I have only "seconds" available to write a post.

Other "chronic" cases are

raise <-> rise
remainder <-> reminder
prize <-> price
lie <-> lay

Also here I know the right answer in each case, but I have to think for a moment each time...Intuitively --and that's the problem here-- I often get it wrong, presumably because of some hidden "Germanisms" deep down...

Cheers,
Bye Fridger

[Spaceman Spiff]

I actually DO know how it's correctly written, ...

Indeed, it's just when English people themselves don't know!

Here's another one for the Celestia community in general,* but the other way around: a very common mistake by non-native English speakers is to substitute the infinitive for the present continuous. Example:

- Right: "I'm thinking of going to lunch now."
- Wrong: "I'm thinking to go to lunch now."

This error is so popular by Germans, French, etc. that I've heard many English people here in Darmstadt use the same construction...

Spiff.

* I mean, another free English lesson for non-native English speakers, entirely free of charge! Aren't I generous?

[Spaceman Spiff]

OK, back onto the topic...

Well, some dismiss Hunter Parasite as speaking 'quack'. I'd guess HP's not speaking quack, but speaking something different: 'I-read this-and-I-want-to-tell-you-about-it!'

I am just saying what I have seen and heard and by seen I mean TV internet etc. and that it has infact been proven by those who posess the knowledge.

So, I think I can claim to be right: HP's repeating something he's seen, it's a bit garbled, and we don't quite follow.

HP, can you remember anything about where you saw this stuff? What's this about infinite kinetic energy? How can the tennis ball have 'infinite' energy when the Sun will stop producing it one day?

By the way, I hope you're not too upset at the usurpation of your topic for the purposes of fun!

Spiff.