On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 9:14:17 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:

<snip>

> You said that I made an error of using weight as mass in the kinetic
> energy. Would you care to look again, sir elder? And after doing that, will
> someone with the wisdom of years be able to offer that he has made a
> mistake?

You wrote:

Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms,
we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate:
400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2

Are you telling that your watermelon weight about 90 kilograms? Really?

That's a hell of a watermelon.

On 13-Mar-22 11:10 am, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 8:07:49 PM UTC-3, Sylvia Else wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Your post fits into the "not even wrong" category. Heads up - that's not a good thing.
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
>
> The amount of energy delivered to the surface of the earth is 1370 W/m^2 at the latitude where the sun is directly overhead.
>
> WRONG VALUE. A COMMON MISTAKE IN MANY SITES.
>
> So let's take a watermelon, which has a cross-sectional area of about
> 0.20 m^2, and we'll drop it from the third story (10 meters up) of a
> city parking garage. The maximal amount of photonic energy it can absorb
> from above is therefore 1370 W/m^2 * 0.2 m^2 = 275 W roughly, certainly
> no more than 300 W.
>
> WRONG CONCEPT. ENERGY (J) IS NOT POWER (W = J/S).
>
> <snip>
>
> Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms,
> we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate:
> 400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2
> so
> v = 9.4 m/s if ALL of the photonic energy is absorbed and converted into
> kinetic energy rather than heat or anything else.
>
> WRONG CONCEPT. WEIGHT (9 kgF) IS TAKEN AS MASS (M = WEIGHT/g).
>
>
> But the watermelon is observed to have a speed of 9.8 m/s^2 * 1.4 sec =
> 13.7 m/s, which can be measured with a light strobe, a camera, and a
> meter stick mounted at ground level.
>
> WRONG CONCEPT. IS TRYING TO LEAD THIS TO THINKING THAT ABSORBED ENERGY CAUSES MASS INCREMENT.
>
>
> See, Sylvia? 4 huge mistakes in an exercise that has no support in reality.
>
> Plus, beating the poor guy all the way, as if he KNEW BETTER.
>
> Keep supporting him, anyway. I don't care more than what I wrote.
>
> I stick with my position: He's a cretin and an imbecile simultaneously, and always has been (plus a charlatan pretender).

Until we know what your actual conclusion is, and you never reached one
that made any sense, it is impossible to say where your mistakes are.

Sylvia.

On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 2:51:33 AM UTC-3, Sylvia Else wrote:

<snip>

> > I stick with my position: He's a cretin and an imbecile simultaneously, and always has been (plus a charlatan pretender).

> Until we know what your actual conclusion is, and you never reached one
> that made any sense, it is impossible to say where your mistakes are.
>
> Sylvia.

I''m sorry that you didn't understood my conclusions, which are clearly wrote above your line here.

I affirm that Bodkin is "a cretin and an imbecile simultaneously, and always has been (plus a charlatan pretender)", and I have
to add that he's bullying old people without a degree that want to participate at this forum. He find it delightful, because he
can ABUSE of the borrowed knowledge that he COPY, MODIFY & PASTE previous posting it as if it was of his own conception,
after EATING IT from the 100++ books that he charish so much.

In few words: Bodkin is a deceiver, an impostor and also a mathematical inept person who lives his dream of "intellectual superiority"
abusing of interactions with persons that have lesser formal education AND is less capable to defend themselves from abuse.

Is that clear for you now?

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 10:59:28 PM UTC-3, Michael Moroney wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> I've always observed that Odd is one of the better natured posters here.
>> Sometimes someone is dumb enough to get a short rant, but each time I've
>> seen it, the person being replied to did deserve it.
>
> Shut up! Shut up! Shut the fuck up!

Are you talking to your elder?

>
> Some gems of your BBF:
>
> An electron is a quantized disturbance in the electron field, according to Weinberg.
> Then of course you have to remind yourself what Weinberg says a field is, exactly.
> You'll be surprised maybe about how tight the connection is between what
> an electron is and what spacetime is.
>
>
> Nobody offered me a job in a state-sponsored woodworking shop.
> I had to buy or make my own tools, I had to build my own client list,
> I had to find my own wood suppliers. In the first few years of my
> business, I operated at a net loss while making those investments.
>
>
> Ken is as useful as a pile of 1954 Akron telephone
> books and as dumb as half a bale of cotton.
>
>
>
> That's fine. That's one aspect to life. It's called metabolism. Maybe
> with a little bit of homeostasis thrown in.
>
> There are other traits that are also considered essential, which any
> high school biology book will point out:
> 1. Organization (cell structure)
> 2. Response to stimuli
> 3. Growth
> 4. Adaptation
> 5. Reproduction
> not to mention
> 6. Homeostasis
> 7. Metabolism
>
> Tom Roberts intervined: You forgot the essence of life as we know it: replication.
>
>
>
>
> That's not at all the premise of the Hafele-Keating experiment. There is
> a nice book, copyrighted in 1993, that describes this experiment and
> what it showed, for the consumption of laypeople. It's written so that
> people like you won't guess badly based on dim memories and newspaper
> clippings.
>
> Pretty sure both Hafele and Keating were both experts and developers of
> the clocks used, too. Essen disagreed with them, but he did not have
> better credentials than they did about the clocks.
>
>
>
>
> You'll notice that there is no implicit inheritance of those qualities
> from the constituents. The mass of a sea of photons does not inherit
> from the mass of the individual photons. Likewise, the volume of an atom
> does not inherit from the volumes of the electron (which we do not know
> differs from zero) or from the baryons in the nucleus. Indeed, the
> volume of the atom arises from the interactions of the constituents, and
> in fact the same is true for any composite substance, which matter is.
>
> So the fact that quarks might be one-dimensional strings has no bearing
> on whether matter has three-dimensional volume, since what lends the
> volume is not the volume of the quarks but their interactions. Same for
> the interacting fermions inside the proton or comprising the atom.
>
>
>
> Some gems of the Supreme Thinker, and I didn't have to dig too much in the past.

There is no supreme thinking in any of the above.

There is familiarity with Weinberg wrote in a book I read, personal history
about my own business, an opinion about Ken Seto, the high school biology
definition of life, awareness of the history of a famous physics
experiment, and an expression of the current physics view of what drives
physical volume.

These are BASIC things for someone interested in science. Do you think I
should not know basics? Why?

>
> The asshole wrote half of the posts in the 69,816 threads stored here.

Oh I doubt that. I’ve only been here since 2013 or so. This forum has been
around since the 1990s, no? And more active back then.

>
>
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 9:14:17 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> You said that I made an error of using weight as mass in the kinetic
>> energy. Would you care to look again, sir elder? And after doing that, will
>> someone with the wisdom of years be able to offer that he has made a
>> mistake?
>
> You wrote:
>
> Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms,
> we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate:
> 400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2
>
> Are you telling that your watermelon weight about 90 kilograms? Really?
>
> That's a hell of a watermelon.

9 kg, not 90 kg. The weight of the melon in SI units is a bit less than 90
newtons. An apple weighs about 1 newton. A watermelon that weighs 90 apples
is not unusual.

You were going to apologize?

>
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 7:46:46 PM UTC-3, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>
> > Quite possible, but I get no idea from his postings
> > just what he thinks he is thowing flame at,
>
> My point is two-fold: Bodkin is an idiot ignorant pretender AND still
> mocks the elders here about what he dissagree on their understanding of
> physics.

All I see is that you are trying to pick a quarrel
on basis of an eight year old and out of context quote mine.
All I say is that this is not the right way
to conduct usenet discussions.

Please stop making a fool of yourself,

Jan

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 8:07:49 PM UTC-3, Sylvia Else wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Your post fits into the "not even wrong" category. Heads up - that's not a good thing.
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
>
> The amount of energy delivered to the surface of the earth is 1370 W/m^2
> at the latitude where the sun is directly overhead.
>
> WRONG VALUE. A COMMON MISTAKE IN MANY SITES.
>
> So let's take a watermelon, which has a cross-sectional area of about
> 0.20 m^2, and we'll drop it from the third story (10 meters up) of a
> city parking garage. The maximal amount of photonic energy it can absorb
> from above is therefore 1370 W/m^2 * 0.2 m^2 = 275 W roughly, certainly
> no more than 300 W.
>
> WRONG CONCEPT. ENERGY (J) IS NOT POWER (W = J/S).
>
> <snip>
>
> Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms,
> we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate:
> 400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2
> so
> v = 9.4 m/s if ALL of the photonic energy is absorbed and converted into
> kinetic energy rather than heat or anything else.
>
> WRONG CONCEPT. WEIGHT (9 kgF) IS TAKEN AS MASS (M = WEIGHT/g).
>
>
> But the watermelon is observed to have a speed of 9.8 m/s^2 * 1.4 sec =
> 13.7 m/s, which can be measured with a light strobe, a camera, and a
> meter stick mounted at ground level.
>
> WRONG CONCEPT. IS TRYING TO LEAD THIS TO THINKING THAT ABSORBED ENERGY
> CAUSES MASS INCREMENT.
>
>
> See, Sylvia? 4 huge mistakes in an exercise that has no support in reality.
>
> Plus, beating the poor guy all the way, as if he KNEW BETTER.
>
> Keep supporting him, anyway. I don't care more than what I wrote.
>
> I stick with my position: He's a cretin and an imbecile simultaneously,
> and always has been (plus a charlatan pretender).
>

Let’s note a couple things.

First of all, you stripped off the first and last parts of my post that
explained the context of those calculations.

Secondly, I was not replying to Fischer in this post, I was replying to Y,
and so your complaint that I was browbeating Fischer was simply factually
misrepresented.

Third, the conflation of energy and power was done deliberately on my part,
because Y was talking about a qualitative term “photonic induction” and
understood energy but does not understand the distinction between power and
energy. You’ll note my calculations were correct and used the right units.

Fourth, your last complaint that I was trying to show a mass increase from
mass absorption is completely off the mark and has nothing whatsoever to do
with what I was calculating, which leads me to think you yourself did not
read what I was saying carefully, or that you are confused about the
concepts yourself. The fact that you thought I was talking about kgF when I
said no such thing only underscores this.

In your focused diatribe against me, all you are doing is illustrating your
lack of interest in retaining context and actually understanding what you
are reading.

You’ll have my respect when you earn it, not just because you’re older. Old
fools are still fools and should not be treated with deference and respect,
in my opinion. You may, of course, have a different view of your
entitlements.

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 2:51:33 AM UTC-3, Sylvia Else wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>> I stick with my position: He's a cretin and an imbecile simultaneously,
>>> and always has been (plus a charlatan pretender).
>
>> Until we know what your actual conclusion is, and you never reached one
>> that made any sense, it is impossible to say where your mistakes are.
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
> I''m sorry that you didn't understood my conclusions, which are clearly
> wrote above your line here.
>
> I affirm that Bodkin is "a cretin and an imbecile simultaneously, and
> always has been (plus a charlatan pretender)", and I have
> to add that he's bullying old people without a degree that want to
> participate at this forum.

And you believe that old people who not only do not have a degree but also
do not have FIRST-YEAR education on the subject, should be free to
participate in this forum with nothing but encouragement and positive
engagement, just because they’re old? WHY?

> He find it delightful, because he
> can ABUSE of the borrowed knowledge that he COPY, MODIFY & PASTE previous
> posting it as if it was of his own conception
> after EATING IT from the 100++ books that he charish so much.

I do enjoy books, yes. It’s called educating myself.
Now, if you’re the sort that says that book studying is useless, fine,
that’s you. In that case, maybe you’re advocating that only people with
direct career experience should voice anything on a subject. In that case,
the most of the old man posters should heed your advice and not say
anything about fundamental physics, because they didn’t do any in their
careers.

>
> In few words: Bodkin is a deceiver, an impostor and also a mathematical
> inept person who lives his dream of "intellectual superiority"
> abusing of interactions with persons that have lesser formal education
> AND is less capable to defend themselves from abuse.

And should this not encourage them to educate themselves before they open
their yaps on a subject they know nothing about? Or are you saying that old
people should be indulged yapping about things they know nothing about,
just because of advanced age?

>
>
> Is that clear for you now?
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 9:35:03 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>

> > Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms,
> > we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate:
> > 400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2
> >
> > Are you telling that your watermelon weight about 90 kilograms? Really?
> >
> > That's a hell of a watermelon.
> 9 kg, not 90 kg. The weight of the melon in SI units is a bit less than 90
> newtons. An apple weighs about 1 newton. A watermelon that weighs 90 apples
> is not unusual.
>
> You were going to apologize?

Ignorant, trying to save face!

The weight is still measured in KgF (Kilogram Force), which is W = m . g (mass measured in Kg, g is g!).

KE (Joules) = 1/2 MASS (Kg) x VELOCITY² (m/s)²

1 Joule = 1 Kg m²/s² , NOT 1 N m²/s²

Asshole, you used 9 Kg (mass), which has weight of 90 KgF or 90 N in the formula of KE.

But still try to be right, because you are a cretin without shame!

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 9:35:03 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>> Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms,
>>> we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate:
>>> 400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2
>>>
>>> Are you telling that your watermelon weight about 90 kilograms? Really?
>>>
>>> That's a hell of a watermelon.
>> 9 kg, not 90 kg. The weight of the melon in SI units is a bit less than 90
>> newtons. An apple weighs about 1 newton. A watermelon that weighs 90 apples
>> is not unusual.
>>
>> You were going to apologize?
>
> Ignorant, trying to save face!
>
> The weight is still measured in KgF (Kilogram Force), which is W = m . g
> (mass measured in Kg, g is g!).

No, I was quoting a mass in kilograms. 9 kg is the mass of the watermelon.

You going to apologize now? Or is that beneath you because of your age? Old
people shouldn’t have to apologize?

>
> KE (Joules) = 1/2 MASS (Kg) x VELOCITY² (m/s)²
>
> 1 Joule = 1 Kg m²/s² , NOT 1 N m²/s²
>
> Asshole, you used 9 Kg (mass), which has weight of 90 KgF or 90 N in the formula of KE.

I used 9kg (I.e. the mass) in the calculation of the KE. You going to
apologize now?

>
>
> But still try to be right, because you are a cretin without shame!
>
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

As it is said everywhere in the western world (I don't know shit about eastern one), NOBODY resist an archive.

So, as you still PRETEND to defend yourself from your past stupidities (as I would NOT due, nor any other honest person),
you try to scramble with the game of words.

Then, have some more gems. This time, NO DATE FOR YOU!

> Well, much of what took place in science took place because it was hoped that some military
> advantage would be gained, so a government would pay scientists to develop weapons of war.

This is another fine example, Robert, where your beliefs run counter to
facts. Perhaps you could tell me what military advantage was intended to
be found in the following:
- Discovery of X-rays
- Quantum mechanics
- Semiconductors
- the kinetic theory of thermodynamics
- Astronomy
- Cosmology
- the Standard Model of particle interactions

> But every once in a while, some scientist would see something no one else saw, such as Kepler's
> formula for the orbits of the planets.
MY NOTE: Kepler worked DECADES on his laws. I wouldn't call it "seeing" as an instant of powerful insight!

You just asked me a bit ago why I have such a low opinion of humanity.
And here you are commenting on three professions and calling every
member of each of those professions evil.

> No, you have it backwards. Truth in science determines equations.

I'm pretty sure that's not right either, Robert. Truth in science is
determined by measurements. Measurements then tell you which kinds of
equations represent reality and which ones don't. The ones that don't
represent reality are algebraically fine, but they just don't represent
reality because they disagree with measurements.
I think you're very confused about how science works.

MY NOTE: Are you writing about the infinite solutions of GR, the math of SR or the classic method about how science work?

>> Oh dear, Robert. Really? You don't know of anything that goes faster
>> than Mercury that's been observed?

> Well, OK, name something that has been observed going faster than 30 miles per second.

Well, let's see.
The New Horizons probe.
Electrons in an electron microscope, or for that matter in a cathode ray
tube TV.
Cosmic rays.
Protons in a particle accelerator.
Ionized atoms in the RHIC collider.

Lots of things, Robert. Where have you been?

MY NOTE: He specifically asked something THAT HAS BEEN OBSERVED going faster than 30 miles per second.
First class sophist, deceiver, cretin.

I won’t be making a twitter account, thanks. And I think on length
contraction, you and Mr Trump may have a lot in common in that you don’t
let evidence influence what you believe. You just choose what you believe
and stick with that, no matter what.

MY NOTE: You was discussing that length contraction has been observed and measured!

Enough for now.

On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 10:33:29 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 9:35:03 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >>> Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms,
> >>> we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate:
> >>> 400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2
> >>>
> >>> Are you telling that your watermelon weight about 90 kilograms? Really?
> >>>
> >>> That's a hell of a watermelon.
> >> 9 kg, not 90 kg. The weight of the melon in SI units is a bit less than 90
> >> newtons. An apple weighs about 1 newton. A watermelon that weighs 90 apples
> >> is not unusual.
> >>
> >> You were going to apologize?
> >
> > Ignorant, trying to save face!
> >
> > The weight is still measured in KgF (Kilogram Force), which is W = m .. g
> > (mass measured in Kg, g is g!).
> No, I was quoting a mass in kilograms. 9 kg is the mass of the watermelon..
>
> You going to apologize now? Or is that beneath you because of your age? Old
> people shouldn’t have to apologize?
> >
> > KE (Joules) = 1/2 MASS (Kg) x VELOCITY² (m/s)²
> >
> > 1 Joule = 1 Kg m²/s² , NOT 1 N m²/s²
> >
> > Asshole, you used 9 Kg (mass), which has weight of 90 KgF or 90 N in the formula of KE.
> I used 9kg (I.e. the mass) in the calculation of the KE. You going to
> apologize now?
> >
> >
> > But still try to be right, because you are a cretin without shame!
> >
> >
> --
> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Cretin! A 90 KgF watermelon (90 N)? You have no shame!

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 10:33:29 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 9:35:03 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>> Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms,
>>>>> we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate:
>>>>> 400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you telling that your watermelon weight about 90 kilograms? Really?
>>>>>
>>>>> That's a hell of a watermelon.
>>>> 9 kg, not 90 kg. The weight of the melon in SI units is a bit less than 90
>>>> newtons. An apple weighs about 1 newton. A watermelon that weighs 90 apples
>>>> is not unusual.
>>>>
>>>> You were going to apologize?
>>>
>>> Ignorant, trying to save face!
>>>
>>> The weight is still measured in KgF (Kilogram Force), which is W = m . g
>>> (mass measured in Kg, g is g!).
>> No, I was quoting a mass in kilograms. 9 kg is the mass of the watermelon.
>>
>> You going to apologize now? Or is that beneath you because of your age? Old
>> people shouldn’t have to apologize?
>>>
>>> KE (Joules) = 1/2 MASS (Kg) x VELOCITY² (m/s)²
>>>
>>> 1 Joule = 1 Kg m²/s² , NOT 1 N m²/s²
>>>
>>> Asshole, you used 9 Kg (mass), which has weight of 90 KgF or 90 N in the formula of KE.
>> I used 9kg (I.e. the mass) in the calculation of the KE. You going to
>> apologize now?
>>>
>>>
>>> But still try to be right, because you are a cretin without shame!
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>
> Cretin! A 90 KgF watermelon (90 N)? You have no shame!
>
>

If you’re joking now, it’s overworked. If you’re not, it’s pathetic. Either
way, you’re more willing to say something stupid than to apologize. What
does that tell you?

--
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Op 13-mrt.-2022 om 15:01 schreef Odd Bodkin:
> Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 10:33:29 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 9:35:03 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>>>> Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms,
>>>>>> we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate:
>>>>>> 400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are you telling that your watermelon weight about 90 kilograms? Really?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's a hell of a watermelon.
>>>>> 9 kg, not 90 kg. The weight of the melon in SI units is a bit less than 90
>>>>> newtons. An apple weighs about 1 newton. A watermelon that weighs 90 apples
>>>>> is not unusual.
>>>>>
>>>>> You were going to apologize?
>>>>
>>>> Ignorant, trying to save face!
>>>>
>>>> The weight is still measured in KgF (Kilogram Force), which is W = m . g
>>>> (mass measured in Kg, g is g!).
>>> No, I was quoting a mass in kilograms. 9 kg is the mass of the watermelon.
>>>
>>> You going to apologize now? Or is that beneath you because of your age? Old
>>> people shouldn’t have to apologize?
>>>>
>>>> KE (Joules) = 1/2 MASS (Kg) x VELOCITY² (m/s)²
>>>>
>>>> 1 Joule = 1 Kg m²/s² , NOT 1 N m²/s²
>>>>
>>>> Asshole, you used 9 Kg (mass), which has weight of 90 KgF or 90 N in the formula of KE.
>>> I used 9kg (I.e. the mass) in the calculation of the KE. You going to
>>> apologize now?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But still try to be right, because you are a cretin without shame!
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>>
>> Cretin! A 90 KgF watermelon (90 N)? You have no shame!
>>
>>
>
> If you’re joking now, it’s overworked. If you’re not, it’s pathetic. Either
> way, you’re more willing to say something stupid than to apologize. What
> does that tell you?
>

Sounds exactly like Dono.
And of course, like trump.

Dirk Vdm

On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 8:58:13 AM UTC-7, Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
> Op 13-mrt.-2022 om 15:01 schreef Odd Bodkin:
> > Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 10:33:29 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 9:35:03 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> <snip>
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms,
> >>>>>> we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate:
> >>>>>> 400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Are you telling that your watermelon weight about 90 kilograms? Really?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> That's a hell of a watermelon.
> >>>>> 9 kg, not 90 kg. The weight of the melon in SI units is a bit less than 90
> >>>>> newtons. An apple weighs about 1 newton. A watermelon that weighs 90 apples
> >>>>> is not unusual.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You were going to apologize?
> >>>>
> >>>> Ignorant, trying to save face!
> >>>>
> >>>> The weight is still measured in KgF (Kilogram Force), which is W = m . g
> >>>> (mass measured in Kg, g is g!).
> >>> No, I was quoting a mass in kilograms. 9 kg is the mass of the watermelon.
> >>>
> >>> You going to apologize now? Or is that beneath you because of your age? Old
> >>> people shouldn’t have to apologize?
> >>>>
> >>>> KE (Joules) = 1/2 MASS (Kg) x VELOCITY² (m/s)²
> >>>>
> >>>> 1 Joule = 1 Kg m²/s² , NOT 1 N m²/s²
> >>>>
> >>>> Asshole, you used 9 Kg (mass), which has weight of 90 KgF or 90 N in the formula of KE.
> >>> I used 9kg (I.e. the mass) in the calculation of the KE. You going to
> >>> apologize now?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> But still try to be right, because you are a cretin without shame!
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> --
> >>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> >>
> >> Cretin! A 90 KgF watermelon (90 N)? You have no shame!
> >>
> >>
> >
> > If you’re joking now, it’s overworked. If you’re not, it’s pathetic. Either
> > way, you’re more willing to say something stupid than to apologize. What
> > does that tell you?
> >
> Sounds exactly like Dono.
> And of course, like trump.
>
> Dirk Vdm

Drek,

I see that you still have the hard-on.

Richard Hertz wrote:
>
> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 10:33:29 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 9:35:03 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > >>> Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms,
> > >>> we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate:
> > >>> 400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2
> > >>>
> > >>> Are you telling that your watermelon weight about 90 kilograms? Really?
> > >>>
> > >>> That's a hell of a watermelon.
> > >> 9 kg, not 90 kg. The weight of the melon in SI units is a bit less than 90
> > >> newtons. An apple weighs about 1 newton. A watermelon that weighs 90 apples
> > >> is not unusual.
> > >>
> > >> You were going to apologize?
> > >
> > > Ignorant, trying to save face!
> > >
> > > The weight is still measured in KgF (Kilogram Force), which is W = m . g
> > > (mass measured in Kg, g is g!).
> > No, I was quoting a mass in kilograms. 9 kg is the mass of the watermelon.
> >
> > You going to apologize now? Or is that beneath you because of your age? Old
> > people shouldn’t have to apologize?
> > >
> > > KE (Joules) = 1/2 MASS (Kg) x VELOCITY² (m/s)²
> > >
> > > 1 Joule = 1 Kg m²/s² , NOT 1 N m²/s²
> > >
> > > Asshole, you used 9 Kg (mass), which has weight of 90 KgF or 90 N in the formula of KE.
> > I used 9kg (I.e. the mass) in the calculation of the KE. You going to
> > apologize now?
> > >
> > >
> > > But still try to be right, because you are a cretin without shame!
> > >
> > >
> > --
> > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>
> Cretin! A 90 KgF watermelon (90 N)? You have no shame!

Gentlemen, you have to keep in mind that the Odd Bodkin has 'no idea' how much the average weight of a watermelon IS.

The Odd Bodkin writes: "Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds..."

That means, the Odd Bodkin, had to log on the internet
ask Google "How much does a watermelon weigh?"

So, the odd bodkin had 'no idea' how much the average weight of a watermelon is...he has to look it up on Google. Who knows How Much
the odd bodkin has to 'look up' for information on the internet before he puts it all together and post it as if the words are all his very own.

And the truth is..the odd bodkin STILL 'does not know' How much does a watermelon weigh unless he goes to the supermarket picks one up and weighs it.

Then, 'to know' the average weight...he has to weigh every watermelon in the supermarket.

But, the fact is...he gets his 'know' from the internet, same place all the kooks get theirs.

The operative word in Odd Bodkin statement: "Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds..."

is..."Since".

You take out the word "Since" and you left with "the average watermelon is about 20 pounds"

Now it sounds straight from Google.

So, the Odd Bodkin added the word "Since" to own it as if it comes from himself.

Google does not use the word "Since". dats human talk, not machine talk.

You guys don't get the con.

https://www.amazon.com/Big-Story-Confidence-Man/dp/0385495382

The odd bodkin has been conning you guys ever since he first logged on usenet..it's just for laughs. For entertainment purposes only.
(don't you hear the laughter?)

Don't you get it? The only word that belongs to the odd bodkin is..."Since".

The "the average watermelon is about 20 pounds" is Google talk.

"Since" is the con word.

If he wrote the word "Because" instead of since..."Because the average watermelon is about 20 pounds..."

then it sounds like he looked it up on google.

But, "Since" sounds more like coming from a human...Since I Don't Have You. "Since the average watermelon...

It's a Con.

--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge
the unchallengeable.

Den 13.03.2022 15:01, skrev Odd Bodkin:
> Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 10:33:29 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Asshole, you used 9 Kg (mass), which has weight of 90 KgF or 90 N in the formula of KE.
>>> I used 9kg (I.e. the mass) in the calculation of the KE. You going to
>>> apologize now?

>>
>> Cretin! A 90 KgF watermelon (90 N)? You have no shame!
>>

>
> If you’re joking now, it’s overworked. If you’re not, it’s pathetic. Either
> way, you’re more willing to say something stupid than to apologize. What
> does that tell you?
>

He isn't joking.
He actually believes that kilogram force, or kilopond (kp)
is the same as Newton.

But 1 kp = 9.80665 N (as you know)

Richard Hertz, read this:
https://www.sizes.com/units/kilopond.htm

Richard Hertz will now claim that he was joking or trolling.
He will NOT apologize.

--
Paul

https://paulba.no/

Paul B. Andersen <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> wrote:
>
>
> Den 13.03.2022 15:01, skrev Odd Bodkin:
>> Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 10:33:29 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Asshole, you used 9 Kg (mass), which has weight of 90 KgF or 90 N in the formula of KE.
>>>> I used 9kg (I.e. the mass) in the calculation of the KE. You going to
>>>> apologize now?
>
>>>
>>> Cretin! A 90 KgF watermelon (90 N)? You have no shame!
>>>
>
>>
>> If you’re joking now, it’s overworked. If you’re not, it’s pathetic. Either
>> way, you’re more willing to say something stupid than to apologize. What
>> does that tell you?
>>
>
> He isn't joking.
> He actually believes that kilogram force, or kilopond (kp)
> is the same as Newton.
>
> But 1 kp = 9.80665 N (as you know)

It kinda doesn’t matter. I referred to a 9 kg watermelon. Not a 9 KgF
watermelon, not a 9 N watermelon, not a 9 kp watermelon. If he does not
know the size of watermelons or that the SI unit of mass is a kilogram,
that’s entirely an idiocy that a man his age should know better than to
double down on.

>
> Richard Hertz, read this:
> https://www.sizes.com/units/kilopond.htm
>
> Richard Hertz will now claim that he was joking or trolling.
> He will NOT apologize.
>

--
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> wrote:
> Paul B. Andersen <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Den 13.03.2022 15:01, skrev Odd Bodkin:
>>> Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 10:33:29 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Asshole, you used 9 Kg (mass), which has weight of 90 KgF or 90 N in
>>>>>> the formula of KE.
>>>>> I used 9kg (I.e. the mass) in the
>>>>>> calculation of the KE. You going to
>>>>> apologize now?
>>
>>>>
>>>> Cretin! A 90 KgF watermelon (90 N)? You have no shame!
>>>>
>>
>>>
>>> If you’re joking now, it’s overworked. If you’re not, it’s pathetic. Either
>>> way, you’re more willing to say something stupid than to apologize. What
>>> does that tell you?
>>>
>>
>> He isn't joking.
>> He actually believes that kilogram force, or kilopond (kp)
>> is the same as Newton.
>>
>> But 1 kp = 9.80665 N (as you know)
>
> It kinda doesn’t matter. I referred to a 9 kg watermelon. Not a 9 KgF
> watermelon, not a 9 N watermelon, not a 9 kp watermelon. If he does not
> know the size of watermelons or that the SI unit of mass is a kilogram,
> that’s entirely an idiocy that a man his age should know better than to
> double down on.

Now ask yourself. Does an elderly man who has become misanthropic, believes
himself to be among the rarified fraction that’s above the rabble, and who
can neither confess a mistake not apologize for one — has that man earned
your respect? Is he entitled to it anyway?

And if he’s not receiving the respect he thinks he’s entitled to, does that
have as a byproduct the accentuation of the character flaws mentioned
above?

Chicken or egg here?

>
>>
>> Richard Hertz, read this:
>> https://www.sizes.com/units/kilopond.htm
>>
>> Richard Hertz will now claim that he was joking or trolling.
>> He will NOT apologize.
>>
>
>
>

--
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On Sunday, 13 March 2022 at 21:57:17 UTC+1, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:

> Now ask yourself. Does an elderly man who has become misanthropic, believes
> himself to be among the rarified fraction that’s above the rabble, and who
> can neither confess a mistake not apologize for one

Unlike poor idiot woodworker, of course, who would
always gladly confess a mistake - but he can't because
he makes no mistakes:(

Op 13-mrt.-2022 om 21:57 schreef Odd Bodkin:
> Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Paul B. Andersen <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Den 13.03.2022 15:01, skrev Odd Bodkin:
>>>> Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 10:33:29 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Asshole, you used 9 Kg (mass), which has weight of 90 KgF or 90 N in
>>>>>>> the formula of KE.
>>>>>> I used 9kg (I.e. the mass) in the
>>>>>>> calculation of the KE. You going to
>>>>>> apologize now?
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Cretin! A 90 KgF watermelon (90 N)? You have no shame!
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you’re joking now, it’s overworked. If you’re not, it’s pathetic. Either
>>>> way, you’re more willing to say something stupid than to apologize. What
>>>> does that tell you?
>>>>
>>>
>>> He isn't joking.
>>> He actually believes that kilogram force, or kilopond (kp)
>>> is the same as Newton.
>>>
>>> But 1 kp = 9.80665 N (as you know)
>>
>> It kinda doesn’t matter. I referred to a 9 kg watermelon. Not a 9 KgF
>> watermelon, not a 9 N watermelon, not a 9 kp watermelon. If he does not
>> know the size of watermelons or that the SI unit of mass is a kilogram,
>> that’s entirely an idiocy that a man his age should know better than to
>> double down on.
>
> Now ask yourself. Does an elderly man who has become misanthropic, believes
> himself to be among the rarified fraction that’s above the rabble, and who
> can neither confess a mistake not apologize for one — has that man earned
> your respect? Is he entitled to it anyway?
>
> And if he’s not receiving the respect he thinks he’s entitled to, does that
> have as a byproduct the accentuation of the character flaws mentioned
> above?
>
> Chicken or egg here?

No chicken.
No egg.
Just an old moulded turd.

Dirk Vdm

On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 5:57:17 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:

<snip>

> Now ask yourself. Does an elderly man who has become misanthropic, believes
> himself to be among the rarified fraction that’s above the rabble, and who
> can neither confess a mistake not apologize for one — has that man earned
> your respect? Is he entitled to it anyway?
>
> And if he’s not receiving the respect he thinks he’s entitled to, does that
> have as a byproduct the accentuation of the character flaws mentioned
> above?
>
> Chicken or egg here?

I repeat part of the OP, from which you try to divert attention:

STUPIDITY 1: Energy measured in Watts, asshole.

So let's take a watermelon, which has a cross-sectional area of about
0.20 m^2, and we'll drop it from the third story (10 meters up) of a
city parking garage. The maximal amount of photonic *********energy********** it can absorb
from above is therefore 1370 W/m^2 * 0.2 m^2 = 275 W roughly, certainly
no more than ***********300 W.**************

STUPIDITY 2: Using WEIGHT instead of MASS.

Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms,
we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate:

400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2 [THIS, ASSHOLE!]

so
v = 9.4 m/s if ALL of the photonic energy is absorbed and converted into
kinetic energy rather than heat or anything else.

********************************

You are writing about a watermelon that register about 90 Kg, as measured by a market scale (or any scale).

Fuck Newtons. People in general and any industry or service uses Kg, not Newton, as a default unit of weight.
Newton units are correct, but barely used beyond labs.

So, don't try to escape with your cheap sophistry and attempts to use straw man arguments.

You was AN IDIOT, and still are (only that more cautious as you AGE).

And Paul, you was right.

But Bodkin, you are a cretin pretender. You used TWO units incorrectly by then.

But, what can you expect from a humble woodworker living in Kansas? No libraries over there.

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 5:57:17 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
>> Now ask yourself. Does an elderly man who has become misanthropic, believes
>> himself to be among the rarified fraction that’s above the rabble, and who
>> can neither confess a mistake not apologize for one — has that man earned
>> your respect? Is he entitled to it anyway?
>>
>> And if he’s not receiving the respect he thinks he’s entitled to, does that
>> have as a byproduct the accentuation of the character flaws mentioned
>> above?
>>
>> Chicken or egg here?
>
> I repeat part of the OP, from which you try to divert attention:
>
> STUPIDITY 1: Energy measured in Watts, asshole.
>
> So let's take a watermelon, which has a cross-sectional area of about
> 0.20 m^2, and we'll drop it from the third story (10 meters up) of a
> city parking garage. The maximal amount of photonic *********energy********** it can absorb
> from above is therefore 1370 W/m^2 * 0.2 m^2 = 275 W roughly, certainly
> no more than ***********300 W.**************
>
>
> STUPIDITY 2: Using WEIGHT instead of MASS.
>
> Since the average watermelon is about 20 pounds or 9 kilograms,
> we can find the speed this 400 Joules could generate:
>
> 400 J = (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)*(9 kg)*v^2 [THIS, ASSHOLE!]

9 kg mass. What about this do you not understand? How many pounds would a
watermelon of mass 9kg weigh? Can you do that?

>
> so
> v = 9.4 m/s if ALL of the photonic energy is absorbed and converted into
> kinetic energy rather than heat or anything else.
>
> ********************************
>
> You are writing about a watermelon that register about 90 Kg, as measured
> by a market scale (or any scale).
>
> Fuck Newtons.

Keep digging. SI units. Surely you’ve heard of them.

> People in general and any industry or service uses Kg, not Newton, as a
> default unit of weight.
> Newton units are correct, but barely used beyond labs.
>
> So, don't try to escape with your cheap sophistry and attempts to use straw man arguments.
>
> You was AN IDIOT, and still are (only that more cautious as you AGE).
>
> And Paul, you was right.
>
> But Bodkin, you are a cretin pretender. You used TWO units incorrectly by then.
>
> But, what can you expect from a humble woodworker living in Kansas? No
> libraries over there.

Plenty of libraries here. And keep guessing.

>
>
>
>
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 9:06:50 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:

<snip>

> > But, what can you expect from a humble woodworker living in Kansas? No libraries over there.

> Plenty of libraries here. And keep guessing.

Don't worry. I wasn't guessing. Just posting something that you slipped in your heated, 2000 pages long discussion
with Robert Winn about the relationship between sawmills and Lorentz transforms a couple of years ago.

Man, you really know your business and the history of sawmills in US and Canada. You impressed me, really.

The only thing that doesn't fit in your narrative is that you never used the word "timber" again, not before.

Very strange for a committed woodworker that makes tables.

Details, Bodkin, details.

Like the one that you warped from your previous identity before 2013. Details and patterns.

You can't control freudian slips, like a liar can't control subtle body movements when liying. Details.

On 3/14/2022 12:15 AM, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Sunday, March 13, 2022 at 9:06:50 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
[]

> Man, you really know your business and the history of sawmills in US and Canada. You impressed me, really.
>
> The only thing that doesn't fit in your narrative is that you never used the word "timber" again, not before.
>
> Very strange for a committed woodworker that makes tables.
>

Maybe he doesn't cut his own trees for lumber?

> Like the one that you warped from your previous identity before 2013. Details and patterns.

Which is...? (and evidence of that?)
>
> You can't control freudian slips, like a liar can't control subtle body movements when liying. Details.
>