RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On June 21, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >> Newton's third isn't completely reliable.
> >
> > It is, absolutely and completely.
> > If it weren't momentum conservation wouldn't hold.
> > Do you doubt momentum conservation too?
> > Do you believe that your arm swing motions could serve
> > as reactionless rocket drive?
>
> Temper, temper. You sound like a religious believer, throwing a
> tantrum when his god is challenged.
>
> I'll give you a chance to redeem yourself, JJ. Tennis players know
> that a racket delivers more power - pace, as they say - with loose
> stringing. Does that make sense?
>
> Hit a ball against a solid wall, then against a net. Does the net
> return it faster? Is it an energy source? How can a racket with
> loose stringing return with more pace than tight tension?
>
> It's another counter-example to Newton's third.

You are weaseling.
Can you build a reactionless rocket drive
by having a tennis court inside your rocket's cabin?

Yes? No?

Jan

On June 23, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>> Newton's third isn't completely reliable.
>
>>> If it weren't momentum conservation wouldn't hold.
>>> Do you doubt momentum conservation too?
>>> Do you believe that your arm swing motions could serve
>>> as reactionless rocket drive?
>
>> You sound like a religious believer, throwing a
>> tantrum when his god is challenged.
>> I'll give you a chance to redeem yourself, JJ. Tennis players know
>> that a racket delivers more power - pace, as they say - with loose
>> stringing. Does that make sense?
>> Hit a ball against a solid wall, then against a net. Does the net
>> return it faster? Is it an energy source? How can a racket with
>> loose stringing return with more pace than tight tension?
>> It's another counter-example to Newton's third.
>
> You are weaseling.
> Can you build a reactionless rocket drive
> by having a tennis court inside your rocket's cabin?

Why does a loosely strung racket return the ball faster
than a solid surface racket?
You're 0 for 2, JJ.

One more chance. Build a road in a triangle design; a large
closed loop. Drive once around it, and naturally end up
facing the same direction as the start.

That's one revolution: 360*. And you have traversed all 3 angles
of the triangle. Evidently, this universe's geometry is non-Euclidean.

Can you model this peculiarity with general relativity? What does
it tell us about spacetime on the earth's surface?

--
Rich

RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On June 23, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>>> Newton's third isn't completely reliable.
> >
> >>> If it weren't momentum conservation wouldn't hold.
> >>> Do you doubt momentum conservation too?
> >>> Do you believe that your arm swing motions could serve
> >>> as reactionless rocket drive?
> >
> >> You sound like a religious believer, throwing a
> >> tantrum when his god is challenged.
> >> I'll give you a chance to redeem yourself, JJ. Tennis players know
> >> that a racket delivers more power - pace, as they say - with loose
> >> stringing. Does that make sense?
> >> Hit a ball against a solid wall, then against a net. Does the net
> >> return it faster? Is it an energy source? How can a racket with
> >> loose stringing return with more pace than tight tension?
> >> It's another counter-example to Newton's third.
> >
> > You are weaseling.
> > Can you build a reactionless rocket drive
> > by having a tennis court inside your rocket's cabin?
>
> Why does a loosely strung racket return the ball faster
> than a solid surface racket?
> You're 0 for 2, JJ.
>
> One more chance. Build a road in a triangle design; a large
> closed loop. Drive once around it, and naturally end up
> facing the same direction as the start.
>
> That's one revolution: 360*. And you have traversed all 3 angles
> of the triangle. Evidently, this universe's geometry is non-Euclidean.
>
> Can you model this peculiarity with general relativity? What does
> it tell us about spacetime on the earth's surface?

Stop weaseling.
Can you propel a rocket by playing tennis inside
with loosely strung rackets?
(thereby violating Newton's third law and momentum conservation?

Again: Yes? No?

Jan

On June 25, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>>> Newton's third isn't completely reliable.
>
>>>>> If it weren't momentum conservation wouldn't hold.
>>>>> Do you doubt momentum conservation too?
>
>>>> You sound like a religious believer, throwing a
>>>> tantrum when his god is challenged.
>>>> I'll give you a chance to redeem yourself, JJ. Tennis players know
>>>> that a racket delivers more power - pace, as they say - with loose
>>>> stringing. Does that make sense?
>>>> Hit a ball against a solid wall, then against a net. Does the net
>>>> return it faster? How can a racket with loose stringing return with
>>>> more pace than tight tension?
>>>> It's another counter-example to Newton's third.
>
>>> Can you build a reactionless rocket drive
>>> by having a tennis court inside your rocket's cabin?
>
>> Why does a loosely strung racket return the ball faster
>> than a solid surface racket?
>> You're 0 for 2, JJ.
>> One more chance. Build a road in a triangle design; a large
>> closed loop. Drive once around it, and naturally end up
>> facing the same direction as the start.
>> That's one revolution: 360*. And you have traversed all 3 angles
>> of the triangle. Evidently, this universe's geometry is non-Euclidean.
>> Can you model this peculiarity with general relativity? What does
>> it tell us about spacetime on the earth's surface?
>
> Stop weaseling.
> Can you propel a rocket by playing tennis inside
> with loosely strung rackets?
> (thereby violating Newton's third law and momentum conservation?

You're flailing. 0 for 3, JJ.
Try this:

I) Alice and Bob face each other, a mile apart. They approach, each
walking at 2 mph. A bee starts at Alice's shirt, flying between them,
back and forth, at 4 mph. What total distance does the bee fly?

II) After their collision, they separate, each walking backward, at 2 mph,
to their starting points. The bee again flies 4 mph, back and forth.
Does he finish at Alice, Bob, or the middle?

This shows that nature behaves in a way that isn't time symmetric.

--
Rich

RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On June 25, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>>>> Newton's third isn't completely reliable.
> >
> >>>>> If it weren't momentum conservation wouldn't hold.
> >>>>> Do you doubt momentum conservation too?
> >
> >>>> You sound like a religious believer, throwing a
> >>>> tantrum when his god is challenged.
> >>>> I'll give you a chance to redeem yourself, JJ. Tennis players know
> >>>> that a racket delivers more power - pace, as they say - with loose
> >>>> stringing. Does that make sense?
> >>>> Hit a ball against a solid wall, then against a net. Does the net
> >>>> return it faster? How can a racket with loose stringing return with
> >>>> more pace than tight tension?
> >>>> It's another counter-example to Newton's third.
> >
> >>> Can you build a reactionless rocket drive
> >>> by having a tennis court inside your rocket's cabin?
> >
> >> Why does a loosely strung racket return the ball faster
> >> than a solid surface racket?
> >> You're 0 for 2, JJ.
> >> One more chance. Build a road in a triangle design; a large
> >> closed loop. Drive once around it, and naturally end up
> >> facing the same direction as the start.
> >> That's one revolution: 360*. And you have traversed all 3 angles
> >> of the triangle. Evidently, this universe's geometry is non-Euclidean.
> >> Can you model this peculiarity with general relativity? What does
> >> it tell us about spacetime on the earth's surface?
> >
> > Stop weaseling.
> > Can you propel a rocket by playing tennis inside
> > with loosely strung rackets?
> > (thereby violating Newton's third law and momentum conservation?
>
> You're flailing. 0 for 3, JJ.
> Try this:
>
> I) Alice and Bob face each other, a mile apart. They approach, each
> walking at 2 mph. A bee starts at Alice's shirt, flying between them,
> back and forth, at 4 mph. What total distance does the bee fly?
>
> II) After their collision, they separate, each walking backward, at 2 mph,
> to their starting points. The bee again flies 4 mph, back and forth.
> Does he finish at Alice, Bob, or the middle?
>
> This shows that nature behaves in a way that isn't time symmetric.

Again: Stop weaseling.
Can you propel a rocket by playing tennis inside
with loosely strung rackets?
(thereby violating Newton's third law and momentum conservation?

Again: Yes? No?

Jan

On June 28, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>>> Hit a ball against a solid wall, then against a net. Does the net
> >>>> return it faster? How can a racket with loose stringing return with
> >>>> more pace than tight tension?
> >>>> It's another counter-example to Newton's third.
>
> >>> Can you build a reactionless rocket drive
> >>> by having a tennis court inside your rocket's cabin?
>
>> I) Alice and Bob face each other, a mile apart. They approach, each
>> walking at 2 mph. A bee starts at Alice's shirt, flying between them,
>> back and forth, at 4 mph. What total distance does the bee fly?
>> II) After their collision, they separate, each walking backward, at 2 mph,
>> to their starting points. The bee again flies 4 mph, back and forth.
>> Does he finish at Alice, Bob, or the middle?
>> This shows that nature behaves in a way that isn't time symmetric.
>
> Can you propel a rocket by playing tennis inside with loosely strung rackets?
> (thereby violating Newton's third law and momentum conservation?

Violation of momentum conservation is well documented -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ESfNy7ljHw

--
Rich

On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 10:58:51 AM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> On June 28, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > >>>> Hit a ball against a solid wall, then against a net. Does the net
> > >>>> return it faster? How can a racket with loose stringing return with
> > >>>> more pace than tight tension?
> > >>>> It's another counter-example to Newton's third.
> >
> > >>> Can you build a reactionless rocket drive
> > >>> by having a tennis court inside your rocket's cabin?
> >
> >> I) Alice and Bob face each other, a mile apart. They approach, each
> >> walking at 2 mph. A bee starts at Alice's shirt, flying between them,
> >> back and forth, at 4 mph. What total distance does the bee fly?
> >> II) After their collision, they separate, each walking backward, at 2 mph,
> >> to their starting points. The bee again flies 4 mph, back and forth.
> >> Does he finish at Alice, Bob, or the middle?
> >> This shows that nature behaves in a way that isn't time symmetric.
> >
> > Can you propel a rocket by playing tennis inside with loosely strung rackets?
> > (thereby violating Newton's third law and momentum conservation?
> Violation of momentum conservation is well documented -
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ESfNy7ljHw
>
> --
> Rich

Astronomical bodies will not stop rotating.
Neither will most form tidally locked.
Does the Earth year change?

Mitchell Raemsch

mitchr...@gmail.com <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 10:58:51?AM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> > On June 28, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > >>>> Hit a ball against a solid wall, then against a net. Does the net
> > > >>>> return it faster? How can a racket with loose stringing return with
> > > >>>> more pace than tight tension?
> > > >>>> It's another counter-example to Newton's third.
> > >
> > > >>> Can you build a reactionless rocket drive
> > > >>> by having a tennis court inside your rocket's cabin?
> > >
> > >> I) Alice and Bob face each other, a mile apart. They approach, each
> > >> walking at 2 mph. A bee starts at Alice's shirt, flying between them,
> > >> back and forth, at 4 mph. What total distance does the bee fly?
> > >> II) After their collision, they separate, each walking backward, at 2
> > >> mph, to their starting points. The bee again flies 4 mph, back and
> > >> forth.
> > >> Does he finish at Alice, Bob, or the middle?
> > >> This shows that nature behaves in a way that isn't time symmetric.
> > >
> > > Can you propel a rocket by playing tennis inside with loosely strung
> > > rackets? (thereby violating Newton's third law and momentum
> > > conservation?
> > Violation of momentum conservation is well documented -
> >
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ESfNy7ljHw
> >
> > --
> > Rich
>
> Astronomical bodies will not stop rotating.
> Neither will most form tidally locked.
> Does the Earth year change?

Yes,

Jan

On Friday, June 30, 2023 at 2:45:41 AM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> mitchr...@gmail.com <mitchr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 10:58:51?AM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> > > On June 28, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > >>>> Hit a ball against a solid wall, then against a net. Does the net
> > > > >>>> return it faster? How can a racket with loose stringing return with
> > > > >>>> more pace than tight tension?
> > > > >>>> It's another counter-example to Newton's third.
> > > >
> > > > >>> Can you build a reactionless rocket drive
> > > > >>> by having a tennis court inside your rocket's cabin?
> > > >
> > > >> I) Alice and Bob face each other, a mile apart. They approach, each
> > > >> walking at 2 mph. A bee starts at Alice's shirt, flying between them,
> > > >> back and forth, at 4 mph. What total distance does the bee fly?
> > > >> II) After their collision, they separate, each walking backward, at 2
> > > >> mph, to their starting points. The bee again flies 4 mph, back and
> > > >> forth.
> > > >> Does he finish at Alice, Bob, or the middle?
> > > >> This shows that nature behaves in a way that isn't time symmetric.
> > > >
> > > > Can you propel a rocket by playing tennis inside with loosely strung
> > > > rackets? (thereby violating Newton's third law and momentum
> > > > conservation?
> > > Violation of momentum conservation is well documented -
> > >
> > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ESfNy7ljHw
> > >
> > > --
> > > Rich
> >
> > Astronomical bodies will not stop rotating.
> > Neither will most form tidally locked.
> > Does the Earth year change?
> Yes,
>
> Jan

Then how jan?

Mitchell Raemsch

mitchr...@gmail.com <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Friday, June 30, 2023 at 2:45:41?AM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > mitchr...@gmail.com <mitchr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 10:58:51?AM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> > > > On June 28, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > > >>>> Hit a ball against a solid wall, then against a net. Does the
> > > > > >>>> net return it faster? How can a racket with loose stringing
> > > > > >>>> return with more pace than tight tension?
> > > > > >>>> It's another counter-example to Newton's third.
> > > > >
> > > > > >>> Can you build a reactionless rocket drive
> > > > > >>> by having a tennis court inside your rocket's cabin?
> > > > >
> > > > >> I) Alice and Bob face each other, a mile apart. They approach,
> > > > >> each walking at 2 mph. A bee starts at Alice's shirt, flying
> > > > >> between them, back and forth, at 4 mph. What total distance does
> > > > >> the bee fly?
> > > > >> II) After their collision, they separate, each walking backward,
> > > > >> at 2 mph, to their starting points. The bee again flies 4 mph,
> > > > >> back and forth.
> > > > >> Does he finish at Alice, Bob, or the middle?
> > > > >> This shows that nature behaves in a way that isn't time symmetric.
> > > > >
> > > > > Can you propel a rocket by playing tennis inside with loosely strung
> > > > > rackets? (thereby violating Newton's third law and momentum
> > > > > conservation?
> > > > Violation of momentum conservation is well documented -
> > > >
> > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ESfNy7ljHw
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Rich
> > >
> > > Astronomical bodies will not stop rotating.
> > > Neither will most form tidally locked.
> > > Does the Earth year change?
> > Yes,
> >
> > Jan
>
> Then how jan?
>
> Mitchell Raemsch

Sorry, spoon feeding time is over.
Do try to grow up on your own,

Jan

On Thursday, June 29, 2023 at 9:07:05 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 10:58:51 AM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> > On June 28, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > >>>> Hit a ball against a solid wall, then against a net. Does the net
> > > >>>> return it faster? How can a racket with loose stringing return with
> > > >>>> more pace than tight tension?
> > > >>>> It's another counter-example to Newton's third.
> > >
> > > >>> Can you build a reactionless rocket drive
> > > >>> by having a tennis court inside your rocket's cabin?
> > >
> > >> I) Alice and Bob face each other, a mile apart. They approach, each
> > >> walking at 2 mph. A bee starts at Alice's shirt, flying between them,
> > >> back and forth, at 4 mph. What total distance does the bee fly?
> > >> II) After their collision, they separate, each walking backward, at 2 mph,
> > >> to their starting points. The bee again flies 4 mph, back and forth.
> > >> Does he finish at Alice, Bob, or the middle?
> > >> This shows that nature behaves in a way that isn't time symmetric.
> > >
> > > Can you propel a rocket by playing tennis inside with loosely strung rackets?
> > > (thereby violating Newton's third law and momentum conservation?
> > Violation of momentum conservation is well documented -
> >
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ESfNy7ljHw
> >
> > --
> > Rich
> Astronomical bodies will not stop rotating.
> Neither will most form tidally locked.
> Does the Earth year change?

Google is your friend, Mitch... look it up!