I can't let this gem pass. It's a sample of the power of thought of
The Supreme Thinker and one of the rare posts where he uses his math:

Can you spot the error(s)?

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

Dec 2, 2014, 5:17:02 PM

Almost all of the photonic flow down onto the surface of the earth is
due to the sun. 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.
(At different latitutes, it's less.)

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.

This is of course presuming that none of the
photonic energy is reflected and that all of it is absorbed, which isn't
true but assuming that anyway will give us a maximum limit.
It takes 1.4 seconds for a watermelon released from rest to fall to the
ground. During this time, it will absorb 275 W * 1.4 sec = 400 joules roughly.

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.

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.
*************************************************
??

On 12-Mar-22 5:20 pm, Richard Hertz wrote:
> I can't let this gem pass. It's a sample of the power of thought of
> The Supreme Thinker and one of the rare posts where he uses his math:
>
> Can you spot the error(s)?
>
> *************************************************
>
> Dec 2, 2014, 5:17:02 PM
>
> Almost all of the photonic flow down onto the surface of the earth is
> due to the sun. 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.
> (At different latitutes, it's less.)
>
> 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.
>
> This is of course presuming that none of the
> photonic energy is reflected and that all of it is absorbed, which isn't
> true but assuming that anyway will give us a maximum limit.
> It takes 1.4 seconds for a watermelon released from rest to fall to the
> ground. During this time, it will absorb 275 W * 1.4 sec = 400 joules roughly.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
> *************************************************
> ??

You've truly surpassed yourself.

And I don't mean that in a good way.

What has the kinetic energy due to the absorption of light got to do
with the speed the melon reaches under the influence of gravity?

Sylvia.

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:

> I can't let this gem pass. It's a sample of the power of thought of
> The Supreme Thinker and one of the rare posts where he uses his math:
>
> Can you spot the error(s)?

[Context missing, and needed]

Jan

On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 5:44:45 AM UTC-3, Sylvia Else wrote:
> On 12-Mar-22 5:20 pm, Richard Hertz wrote:
> > I can't let this gem pass. It's a sample of the power of thought of
> > The Supreme Thinker and one of the rare posts where he uses his math:
> >
> > Can you spot the error(s)?
> >
> > *************************************************
> >
> > Dec 2, 2014, 5:17:02 PM
> >
> > Almost all of the photonic flow down onto the surface of the earth is
> > due to the sun. 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.
> > (At different latitutes, it's less.)
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > This is of course presuming that none of the
> > photonic energy is reflected and that all of it is absorbed, which isn't
> > true but assuming that anyway will give us a maximum limit.
> > It takes 1.4 seconds for a watermelon released from rest to fall to the
> > ground. During this time, it will absorb 275 W * 1.4 sec = 400 joules roughly.
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > 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.
> > *************************************************
> > ??
> You've truly surpassed yourself.
>
> And I don't mean that in a good way.
>
> What has the kinetic energy due to the absorption of light got to do
> with the speed the melon reaches under the influence of gravity?
>
> Sylvia.

Exactly. You have to ask to Bodkin, not to me. There you have the timestamp of his post by then.

And he's an advocate of relativity.

Did you find the error(s)?

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> I can't let this gem pass. It's a sample of the power of thought of
> The Supreme Thinker and one of the rare posts where he uses his math:
>
> Can you spot the error(s)?
>
> *************************************************
>
> Dec 2, 2014, 5:17:02 PM
>
> Almost all of the photonic flow down onto the surface of the earth is
> due to the sun. 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.
> (At different latitutes, it's less.)
>
> 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.
>
> This is of course presuming that none of the
> photonic energy is reflected and that all of it is absorbed, which isn't
> true but assuming that anyway will give us a maximum limit.
> It takes 1.4 seconds for a watermelon released from rest to fall to the
> ground. During this time, it will absorb 275 W * 1.4 sec = 400 joules roughly.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
> *************************************************
> ??
>

Why does a crazy person mine a 7-year-old post, remove all the context, and
apparently have no point?

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

On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 12:06:58 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I can't let this gem pass. It's a sample of the power of thought of
> > The Supreme Thinker and one of the rare posts where he uses his math:
> >
> > Can you spot the error(s)?
> >
> > *************************************************
> >
> > Dec 2, 2014, 5:17:02 PM
> >
> > Almost all of the photonic flow down onto the surface of the earth is
> > due to the sun. 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.
> > (At different latitutes, it's less.)
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > This is of course presuming that none of the
> > photonic energy is reflected and that all of it is absorbed, which isn't
> > true but assuming that anyway will give us a maximum limit.
> > It takes 1.4 seconds for a watermelon released from rest to fall to the
> > ground. During this time, it will absorb 275 W * 1.4 sec = 400 joules roughly.
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > 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.
> > *************************************************
> > ??
> >
> Why does a crazy person mine a 7-year-old post, remove all the context, and
> apparently have no point?
>
> --
> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Because I didn't like that you abused of an 86 years old person with endless discussions for several years (Fischer),
seemingly enjoying in a sadistic way your superiority.

And this behavior with this elder is not the only one.

It seems that you are fond of this kind of behavior with very old people, but feel bad when they die (one year later, in this case).

I find this attitude despicable.

Do you get my point now, Bodkin?

Besides the stupid post, where you use weight instead of mass to calculate KE, plus the wrong value of energy, plus confusing
watts with joules plus the stupid post by itself.

Stick with woodworking.

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 12:06:58 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I can't let this gem pass. It's a sample of the power of thought of
>>> The Supreme Thinker and one of the rare posts where he uses his math:
>>>
>>> Can you spot the error(s)?
>>>
>>> *************************************************
>>>
>>> Dec 2, 2014, 5:17:02 PM
>>>
>>> Almost all of the photonic flow down onto the surface of the earth is
>>> due to the sun. 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.
>>> (At different latitutes, it's less.)
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>> This is of course presuming that none of the
>>> photonic energy is reflected and that all of it is absorbed, which isn't
>>> true but assuming that anyway will give us a maximum limit.
>>> It takes 1.4 seconds for a watermelon released from rest to fall to the
>>> ground. During this time, it will absorb 275 W * 1.4 sec = 400 joules roughly.
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>> 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.
>>> *************************************************
>>> ??
>>>
>> Why does a crazy person mine a 7-year-old post, remove all the context, and
>> apparently have no point?
>>
>> --
>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>
> Because I didn't like that you abused of an 86 years old person with
> endless discussions for several years (Fischer),
> seemingly enjoying in a sadistic way your superiority.

Why would I know his age? Why do you? Why was it important?

>
> And this behavior with this elder is not the only one.
>
> It seems that you are fond of this kind of behavior with very old people,
> but feel bad when they die (one year later, in this case).
>
> I find this attitude despicable.
>
> Do you get my point now, Bodkin?
>
> Besides the stupid post, where you use weight instead of mass to
> calculate KE, plus the wrong value of energy, plus confusing
> watts with joules plus the stupid post by itself.

Where did you think I used the weight of the melon?

>
> Stick with woodworking.
>
>

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

On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 4:34:06 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
<snip>

> Why would I know his age? Why do you? Why was it important?

Ahh! Memory gaps.

Because he told you openly!

He wrote that you wasn't giving a flying fuck for the knowledge he accumulated in his 86 years of life. You DISRESPECTED HIM
many times, one way or another, in the same thread.

You felt sorry when he died next year, and you wrote so. But he LET KNOW he was ill, and you didn't give a shit.

Why didn't you just LEFT HIM ALONE? And your behavior has been repetitive with MANY than now ARE NOT with us.

What's wrong with you and very old people posting here? Do you think that this place is only for young people?

Live and LET LIVE, Bodkin. Just stop it. You are MEAN even today. I don't care why, but just want you to realize what you did/do.

Just re-read your discussions with elders (I'll not make names here) just in the last 2 years. You know perfectly what I'm writing about.

And THIS THREAD is not the first on its kind that I wrote TO YOU in the past 10 months.

I warned you about your NASTY behavior with some old person here about 6/7 months ago.

Richard Hertz wrote:
>
> On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 12:06:58 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I can't let this gem pass. It's a sample of the power of thought of
> > > The Supreme Thinker and one of the rare posts where he uses his math:
> > >
> > > Can you spot the error(s)?
> > >
> > > *************************************************
> > >
> > > Dec 2, 2014, 5:17:02 PM
> > >
> > > Almost all of the photonic flow down onto the surface of the earth is
> > > due to the sun. 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.
> > > (At different latitutes, it's less.)
> > >
> > > 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.
> > >
> > > This is of course presuming that none of the
> > > photonic energy is reflected and that all of it is absorbed, which isn't
> > > true but assuming that anyway will give us a maximum limit.
> > > It takes 1.4 seconds for a watermelon released from rest to fall to the
> > > ground. During this time, it will absorb 275 W * 1.4 sec = 400 joules roughly.
> > >
> > > 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.
> > >
> > > 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.
> > > *************************************************
> > > ??
> > >
> > Why does a crazy person mine a 7-year-old post, remove all the context, and
> > apparently have no point?
> >
> > --
> > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>
> Because I didn't like that you abused of an 86 years old person with endless discussions for several years (Fischer),
> seemingly enjoying in a sadistic way your superiority.
>
> And this behavior with this elder is not the only one.
>
> It seems that you are fond of this kind of behavior with very old people, but feel bad when they die (one year later, in this case).
>
> I find this attitude despicable.

An explosion is an explosion
A birth is a birth
A bully is a bully.

Oh come on, you're being unfair now...a bully is a bully. Maybe ...unconsciously he might be unaware of his bully mentality.

Are you German ...Richard? Did you know Albert Einstein said the Germans have an ...aggressive mentality?

Are you aware of your ...aggressive mentality????

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

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 4:34:06 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> <snip>
>
>> Why would I know his age? Why do you? Why was it important?
>
> Ahh! Memory gaps.
>
> Because he told you openly!

Ok, that was almost 8 years ago.

>
> He wrote that you wasn't giving a flying fuck for the knowledge he
> accumulated in his 86 years of life. You DISRESPECTED HIM
> many times, one way or another, in the same thread.

And if he doesn’t know how to do the calculation and I show him, what does
his age have to do with it.

>
> You felt sorry when he died next year, and you wrote so. But he LET KNOW
> he was ill, and you didn't give a shit.
>
> Why didn't you just LEFT HIM ALONE?

If he’s posting to a discussion forum, do you think he’s looking to be left
alone?

> And your behavior has been repetitive with MANY than now ARE NOT with us.
>
> What's wrong with you and very old people posting here? Do you think that
> this place is only for young people?
>

If old people post here spouting nonsense, what do you think is the proper
response?

> Live and LET LIVE, Bodkin. Just stop it. You are MEAN even today. I don't
> care why, but just want you to realize what you did/do.

I know exactly what I do. Are you asking that old people (like you) get
treated differently because of their age? More gently, more deferentially,
less direct? WHY? You think they don’t have the strength to own their own
mistakes?

>
> Just re-read your discussions with elders (I'll not make names here) just
> in the last 2 years. You know perfectly what I'm writing about.
>
> And THIS THREAD is not the first on its kind that I wrote TO YOU in the past 10 months.

I know that. And why do you think I care what you think I should be going?
Just because you’re older?

>
> I warned you about your NASTY behavior with some old person here about 6/7 months ago.
>
>

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

On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 5:13:52 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 4:34:06 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> > <snip>
> >
> >> Why would I know his age? Why do you? Why was it important?
> >
> > Ahh! Memory gaps.
> >
> > Because he told you openly!
> Ok, that was almost 8 years ago.
> >
> > He wrote that you wasn't giving a flying fuck for the knowledge he
> > accumulated in his 86 years of life. You DISRESPECTED HIM
> > many times, one way or another, in the same thread.
> And if he doesn’t know how to do the calculation and I show him, what does
> his age have to do with it.
> >
> > You felt sorry when he died next year, and you wrote so. But he LET KNOW
> > he was ill, and you didn't give a shit.
> >
> > Why didn't you just LEFT HIM ALONE?
> If he’s posting to a discussion forum, do you think he’s looking to be left
> alone?
> > And your behavior has been repetitive with MANY than now ARE NOT with us.
> >
> > What's wrong with you and very old people posting here? Do you think that
> > this place is only for young people?
> >
> If old people post here spouting nonsense, what do you think is the proper
> response?
> > Live and LET LIVE, Bodkin. Just stop it. You are MEAN even today. I don't
> > care why, but just want you to realize what you did/do.
> I know exactly what I do. Are you asking that old people (like you) get
> treated differently because of their age? More gently, more deferentially,
> less direct? WHY? You think they don’t have the strength to own their own
> mistakes?
> >
> > Just re-read your discussions with elders (I'll not make names here) just
> > in the last 2 years. You know perfectly what I'm writing about.
> >
> > And THIS THREAD is not the first on its kind that I wrote TO YOU in the past 10 months.
> I know that. And why do you think I care what you think I should be going?
> Just because you’re older?
> >
> > I warned you about your NASTY behavior with some old person here about 6/7 months ago.
> >
> >
> --
> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Ahh! The cornered rat is trying a straw man tactic.

I'm not that older to match your killing targets. I'd need to add 20 years more.

But tell me, sincerely, why do you enjoy torturing very old people?

Does it makes feel you better, woodworker?

You are a fraud, a failed person. And you vent your issues through your pompous posts, Supreme Thinker (among the very old people).

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 5:13:52 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 4:34:06 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> Why would I know his age? Why do you? Why was it important?
>>>
>>> Ahh! Memory gaps.
>>>
>>> Because he told you openly!
>> Ok, that was almost 8 years ago.
>>>
>>> He wrote that you wasn't giving a flying fuck for the knowledge he
>>> accumulated in his 86 years of life. You DISRESPECTED HIM
>>> many times, one way or another, in the same thread.
>> And if he doesn’t know how to do the calculation and I show him, what does
>> his age have to do with it.
>>>
>>> You felt sorry when he died next year, and you wrote so. But he LET KNOW
>>> he was ill, and you didn't give a shit.
>>>
>>> Why didn't you just LEFT HIM ALONE?
>> If he’s posting to a discussion forum, do you think he’s looking to be left
>> alone?
>>> And your behavior has been repetitive with MANY than now ARE NOT with us.
>>>
>>> What's wrong with you and very old people posting here? Do you think that
>>> this place is only for young people?
>>>
>> If old people post here spouting nonsense, what do you think is the proper
>> response?
>>> Live and LET LIVE, Bodkin. Just stop it. You are MEAN even today. I don't
>>> care why, but just want you to realize what you did/do.
>> I know exactly what I do. Are you asking that old people (like you) get
>> treated differently because of their age? More gently, more deferentially,
>> less direct? WHY? You think they don’t have the strength to own their own
>> mistakes?
>>>
>>> Just re-read your discussions with elders (I'll not make names here) just
>>> in the last 2 years. You know perfectly what I'm writing about.
>>>
>>> And THIS THREAD is not the first on its kind that I wrote TO YOU in the past 10 months.
>> I know that. And why do you think I care what you think I should be going?
>> Just because you’re older?
>>>
>>> I warned you about your NASTY behavior with some old person here about 6/7 months ago.
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>
> Ahh! The cornered rat is trying a straw man tactic.
>
> I'm not that older to match your killing targets. I'd need to add 20 years more.
>
> But tell me, sincerely, why do you enjoy torturing very old people?

If you view the above post that started this thread as torture, you’ll have
to explain why.

Let’s look at Ken Seto who is also I’m his mid 80s. He claims Newtonian
basics are all wrong, and that he has a physics theory of everything
despite his being unable to do a lick of math by his own admission. How do
you think this person should be treated? Gently? Deferentially? WHY?

>
> Does it makes feel you better, woodworker?
>
> You are a fraud, a failed person.

What do you claim I am trying to do that I have failed to do? What
fraudulent representation am I putting out there?

> And you vent your issues through your pompous posts, Supreme Thinker
> (among the very old people).
>
>

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

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:

> Do you get my point now, Bodkin?

FYI, nobody is getting your point.

Jan

J. J. Lodder <nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:
> Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Do you get my point now, Bodkin?
>
> FYI, nobody is getting your point.
>
> Jan
>

I get the feeling this kind of post by him is a huge “how DARE you!” which
is rich given his liberal usage of a flamethrower.

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

Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> wrote:

> J. J. Lodder <nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:
> > Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Do you get my point now, Bodkin?
> >
> > FYI, nobody is getting your point.
> >
> > Jan
> >
>
> I get the feeling this kind of post by him is a huge "how DARE you!" which
> is rich given his liberal usage of a flamethrower.

Quite possible, but I get no idea from his postings
just what he thinks he is thowing flame at,

Jan

On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 6:06:28 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:

<snip>

> Let’s look at Ken Seto who is also I’m his mid 80s. He claims Newtonian
> basics are all wrong, and that he has a physics theory of everything
> despite his being unable to do a lick of math by his own admission. How do
> you think this person should be treated? Gently? Deferentially? WHY?

Because you have to RESPECT the elders, SOB!

Not to laugh at him because "he invested all his money in self-publishing", or treating him as if he was some kind of retarded.

And you did the same thing, time after time, with others that LEFT this site because of your bullying.

Karma is a bitch, it's said over there.

No escupas para arriba, we say over here.

If you was at any asian country, they would have you hanging by your balls for your disrespect.

Or here.

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.

This situation is the one that doesn't make sense: an imbecile judging other's people knowledge?

And better for you, Bodkin, that nobody is paying attention to the incredible stupidity that you wrote and I C&P in my OP here.

Are you really in a position to judge anything on physics?

But but you are an imbecile, how could you be taken seriously?

On 12-Mar-22 10:48 pm, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 5:44:45 AM UTC-3, Sylvia Else wrote:
>> On 12-Mar-22 5:20 pm, Richard Hertz wrote:
>>> I can't let this gem pass. It's a sample of the power of thought of
>>> The Supreme Thinker and one of the rare posts where he uses his math:
>>>
>>> Can you spot the error(s)?
>>>
>>> *************************************************
>>>
>>> Dec 2, 2014, 5:17:02 PM
>>>
>>> Almost all of the photonic flow down onto the surface of the earth is
>>> due to the sun. 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.
>>> (At different latitutes, it's less.)
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>> This is of course presuming that none of the
>>> photonic energy is reflected and that all of it is absorbed, which isn't
>>> true but assuming that anyway will give us a maximum limit.
>>> It takes 1.4 seconds for a watermelon released from rest to fall to the
>>> ground. During this time, it will absorb 275 W * 1.4 sec = 400 joules roughly.
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>> 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.
>>> *************************************************
>>> ??
>> You've truly surpassed yourself.
>>
>> And I don't mean that in a good way.
>>
>> What has the kinetic energy due to the absorption of light got to do
>> with the speed the melon reaches under the influence of gravity?
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
> Exactly. You have to ask to Bodkin, not to me. There you have the timestamp of his post by then.
>
> And he's an advocate of relativity.
>
> Did you find the error(s)?

Your post fits into the "not even wrong" category. Heads up - that's not
a good thing.

Sylvia.

Richard Hertz wrote:

> 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.
>
> This situation is the one that doesn't make sense: an imbecile judging
> other's people knowledge?

"And you will hear rumors of wars". Rumors.

Tracking Down _FAKE_ News Media about The Ukraine WAR - THEY ARE LYING TO
YOU! https://www.bitchute.com/video/OtObCXviQAei/

Nuke Hoax! https://www.bitchute.com/video/3NrkhZlxlAQg/

And here an ukrainian "refuge" asking the reporter about legalized weed
and cannabis in UK. Apparently he knows nothing about the war.

Sky news: Are you all right?
https://www.brighteon.com/a4143150-9c5b-4f5b-adf0-4277ceb22103

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).

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, March 12, 2022 at 6:06:28 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Let’s look at Ken Seto who is also I’m his mid 80s. He claims Newtonian
>> basics are all wrong, and that he has a physics theory of everything
>> despite his being unable to do a lick of math by his own admission. How do
>> you think this person should be treated? Gently? Deferentially? WHY?
>
> Because you have to RESPECT the elders, SOB!

I respect those who have earned my respect, and the number of candles on a
birthday cake doesn’t do it.

>
> Not to laugh at him because "he invested all his money in
> self-publishing", or treating him as if he was some kind of retarded.

What he did was foolish. He self-published a book about a subject he knows
nothing about, because he thought physics would earn him a shinier legacy —
and he has said as much.

He cannot do high school physics and his response is that anything he does
not understand is rejected and wrong. And you expect people to RESPECT
that, because if his years?

And you. What respect have you shown to people older than you on this
forum? None. You flame liberally and randomly, and you offer the excuse
that you are “only trolling”. Is “only trolling” an expression of respect?
When you do that, do YOU earn respect?

>
> And you did the same thing, time after time, with others that LEFT this
> site because of your bullying.
>
> Karma is a bitch, it's said over there.
>
> No escupas para arriba, we say over here.
>
> If you was at any asian country, they would have you hanging by your
> balls for your disrespect.
>
> Or here.
>
>
>

--
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.
>
> This situation is the one that doesn't make sense: an imbecile judging
> other's people knowledge?
>

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?

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

On 3/12/2022 5:52 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:

> If you was at any asian country, they would have you hanging by your balls for your disrespect.
>
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.

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!

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.

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