John Mandlbaur

85K posts

John Mandlbaur

John Mandlbaur

@Mandlbaur

Inventor & Founder, Baur Research.

Randburg, South Africa 가입일 Ocak 2011
2.9K 팔로잉404 팔로워
고정된 트윗
John Mandlbaur
John Mandlbaur@Mandlbaur·
@NASA @NASAArtemis @JimFree @SciGuySpace Artemis II has a math problem. On Feb 10, watch for a 145–180 kg propellant surplus that NASA's models can't explain. I am timestamping this prediction 17 days before launch. Telemetry will confirm. (1/2)
English
2
0
2
3.6K
Severn Dweller
Severn Dweller@SevernDweller·
@Mandlbaur @Chucktown_Tiger @alexboge Every experiment has torque. The textbook is clearly presenting this as a mathematical example and not an experimental prediction. Would you expect every ball and string with a small object with any mass "m" and any w/r/t to behave the same way? That's what you're suggesting.
English
1
0
0
3
Alex Boge
Alex Boge@alexboge·
These two geniuses think I’m a flat earther and moon landing denier. On my post mocking moon landing deniers... 🙄😂
Alex Boge tweet media
English
12
2
71
1.9K
John Mandlbaur
John Mandlbaur@Mandlbaur·
@HiddenPinky @haprho Holding up the ignorance in my face and proclaiming not effective against ignorance, is it? As if the facts will change if everyone just ignores them enough, is insane behaviour. No offence intended.
English
1
0
0
4
Hap Rho
Hap Rho@haprho·
Aww, poor flerfs — they think sunsets are caused by ... perspective
Hap Rho tweet media
English
12
0
17
415
John Mandlbaur
John Mandlbaur@Mandlbaur·
@SevernDweller @Chucktown_Tiger @alexboge Your "measurement" is biased lies. You have to measure the fastest revolution. You must be nuts to claim that it only spins less than 3 times faster. This is delusional speculations. No offence intended. 1200 rpm minus friction explains the results if you measure honestly.
English
2
0
0
6
Severn Dweller
Severn Dweller@SevernDweller·
@Mandlbaur @Chucktown_Tiger @alexboge It confirms that the demonstration isn't conserving all of its angular momentum. It gets to around 5.8rps which is 345rpm. A far cry from 1200rpm. The constant loss of angular momentum plus energy being added slowly is all you need to explain this. What happens at the end?
English
1
0
0
6
John Mandlbaur
John Mandlbaur@Mandlbaur·
@GeneModifiedCat @Ferrari_ball @alexboge The conclusion of the paper is what is being escaped. Angular momentum is not conserved. A historic watershed moment. We are about to step into a world of space navigation competence. But scientists are terrified of change and behave insane in denial.
English
0
0
0
4
John Mandlbaur
John Mandlbaur@Mandlbaur·
@DeeWaynee94 Scientists refuse to test conservation of angular energy as a method of predicting a ball on a string because it is accurate. Here is someone who confirms it by mistake: The first result counts and him trying to pull harder after is not evidence. youtube.com/clip/Ugkxa_s90…
English
0
0
0
5
Dee 🌹
Dee 🌹@DeeWaynee94·
“conservation of angular energy” isn’t even the standard law. You’re muddling angular momentum with energy, then acting persecuted because nobody rates the mash-up. Scientists test these things constantly. Your theory didn’t get suppressed. It just didn’t survive contact with the maths.
English
1
0
0
12
Dee 🌹
Dee 🌹@DeeWaynee94·
Scientists question evolution all the time. That’s why the theory got stronger, not weaker. “Darwinism” is just the creationist pet name for a field they can’t beat on the evidence. If modern biology rested on pride, new evidence would kill it. That’s literally how science works.
Wendell@wendelltalks

Scientists cannot question Darwinism. Challenge it publicly and you’ll be chastised and ostracized by your peers. Why the fierce protection? It’s baked into biology, psychology, anthropology, medicine, and countless other fields. Overturn it and large swaths of modern science gets discarded overnight, devastating to the community and collapsing public trust in institutions. In fact, I suspect if there was smoking gun evidence that Darwinism is false, many would still cling to it as a matter of pride. This isn’t science. It’s dogma.

English
9
5
36
819
John Mandlbaur
John Mandlbaur@Mandlbaur·
@SevernDweller @Chucktown_Tiger @alexboge I refer to the reference work, example ten. I am literally presenting standard established physics. Your argument in claiming that I make a mistake by assuming standard established physics, is insane. Objectively insane. No offence intended.
John Mandlbaur tweet media
English
1
0
0
6
Severn Dweller
Severn Dweller@SevernDweller·
@Mandlbaur @Chucktown_Tiger @alexboge You started with the *assumption* that the experiment would conserve angular momentum. That's what is invalid. When the experiment did not conserve angular momentum, that showed your assumption was wrong. Making false assumptions is common enough, but you also need to reassess.
English
1
0
0
4
John Mandlbaur
John Mandlbaur@Mandlbaur·
@GeneModifiedCat @Ferrari_ball @alexboge I mean that it is not a valid argument to try and imagine that the moon behaves significantly differently in which conservation law it obeys than the ball on a string obeys, because I have had people try to escape the conclusion using that fallacious reasoning. Did that get you?
English
1
0
0
8
GeneModifiedCat
GeneModifiedCat@GeneModifiedCat·
Fine. What do you mean by adding this phrase (bold, italic) at the end of your paper? Why did you add this phrase? "Since the laws of physics are universal, that which applies to a ball on a string also applies to all other orbits." (emphasis added)
English
1
0
0
6
John Mandlbaur
John Mandlbaur@Mandlbaur·
@SevernDweller @Chucktown_Tiger @alexboge Starting at roughly 2 rps is nominal because it is enough to swing horizontally so no more speed is necessary. So starting at 2 rps, my theory predicts 1200 rpm and physics, by the textbook, predicts 12000 rpm. We observe a little less than 1200 rpm. What does that confirm?
English
1
0
0
10
John Mandlbaur
John Mandlbaur@Mandlbaur·
@SevernDweller @Chucktown_Tiger @alexboge Correct. I have something, and I have chosen to show you that every typical ball on a string demonstration ever conducted in history did not accelerate like a Ferrari engine. That is consistent dataset over multiple masses.
English
1
0
0
8
Severn Dweller
Severn Dweller@SevernDweller·
@Mandlbaur @Chucktown_Tiger @alexboge The statement you can make is that w2/w1<(r1/r2)^2, so angular momentum is not conserved. If you had a consistent dataset over multiple masses, ratios and times then yes, you'd have something. You've started with a premise and worked up to a conjecture. No science involved.
English
1
0
0
9
John Mandlbaur
John Mandlbaur@Mandlbaur·
@DeeWaynee94 Nonsense. If you test it honestly then it confirms a different theory. My theory. conservation of angular energy. The reason it survived is literally nobody questioning it and everyone personally attacking anyone that does.
English
1
0
0
13
Dee 🌹
Dee 🌹@DeeWaynee94·
@Mandlbaur “weak and useless” Scientists don’t refuse to question conservation of angular momentum. They test it constantly. That’s why it survived. A principle that keeps predicting reality is useful. A creationist story that doesn’t is not.
English
1
0
4
25
John Mandlbaur
John Mandlbaur@Mandlbaur·
@GeneModifiedCat @Ferrari_ball @alexboge That is just idiotic fake accusations. Are you upset that I believe the earth is a sphere? WTF is wrong with you? This is a crazy personal attack and it is stupid. No offence intended, but it feels like I am facing a childs tantrum here. Cna we discuss physics rather?
English
1
0
0
15
GeneModifiedCat
GeneModifiedCat@GeneModifiedCat·
@Mandlbaur @Ferrari_ball @alexboge a) You have carefully NOT stated anything affirmative, in fact. It's the first time I've seen you use logic precisely. b) The shape of the Earth is not a theory; it is a measured fact. c) I am not having a mental breakdown. d) Your mental gymnastics are amusing.
English
1
0
1
14
John Mandlbaur
John Mandlbaur@Mandlbaur·
@NASA @NASAArtemis @JimFree @SciGuySpace Artemis II has a math problem. On Feb 10, watch for a 145–180 kg propellant surplus that NASA's models can't explain. I am timestamping this prediction 17 days before launch. Telemetry will confirm. (1/2)
English
2
0
2
3.6K
John Mandlbaur
John Mandlbaur@Mandlbaur·
@SevernDweller @Chucktown_Tiger @alexboge What statement can I make when w2/w1=r1/r2? Because that is how nature operates. Yes, the action goes too fast to measure accurately because of the frame rate, correct. But it can still be derived from the video frame by frame analysis, I believe. Why don't you repeat it better?
English
3
0
0
24
Severn Dweller
Severn Dweller@SevernDweller·
@Mandlbaur @Chucktown_Tiger @alexboge When w2/w1<(r1/r2)^2 the only statement you can make is that the experiment did not conserve angular momentum. It's a 30fps YouTube video, so anything above 10-15rps would show as strobing. That's ~4rps.
English
1
0
0
13
John Mandlbaur
John Mandlbaur@Mandlbaur·
@SevernDweller @Chucktown_Tiger @alexboge 200 rps. is the prediction adn 20 rps is the ideal of my theory . He was not as smooth as he could have been so perhaps a little less than 20 rps. Of course 12000 rpm is absurd. So you concede my reduction then?
English
1
0
0
37
Severn Dweller
Severn Dweller@SevernDweller·
@Mandlbaur @Chucktown_Tiger @alexboge I don't think 1200rpm is achievable. That's 20rps, which would still be dangerous in a classroom and require some force to achieve. I'd say he goes from 2rps to around 4? 120rpm to 240 perhaps? It's not a big speed increase.
English
1
0
0
10
John Mandlbaur
John Mandlbaur@Mandlbaur·
@GeneModifiedCat @alexboge @Ferrari_ball I present a theoretical physics paper precisely so that I don't have to "measure it". You do. The paper proves COAM false, and cannot be faulted. You refusing to concede is insanity, not a scientific win.
English
1
0
0
10
GeneModifiedCat
GeneModifiedCat@GeneModifiedCat·
@Mandlbaur @alexboge @Ferrari_ball You didn't measure it, did you? No, you didn't. And my mistake, I thought you had a SECOND paper, that link was just the first paper again. The incorrect paper that doesn't PROVE anything. When did you MEASURE the rpm?
English
1
0
2
10

탐색

@SevernDweller @Chucktown_Tiger @alexboge @HiddenPinky @haprho @GeneModifiedCat @Ferrari_ball @DeeWaynee94