spinnyastro

@sleenastevens @Mandlbaur @ItSpinsFaster @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling Second accounts, just to argue with JM?! Who would do such a thing ;-)

@spinnyastro @Mandlbaur @ItSpinsFaster @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling Me too. He has previously gone on blocking sprees, looking for new people to engage with. Some of the new people are allegedly the old people with new accounts. Allegedly. 😉

Conspiracy theorists create a world where they can’t be wrong. Evidence doesn’t matter, because they’ve already decided that disagreement = corruption.

@Mandlbaur @sleenastevens @ItSpinsFaster @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling John has now bravely blocked me. Apparently he is against blocking and censorship., but still does it. He is a hypocrit.

@Mandlbaur @sleenastevens @ItSpinsFaster @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling Ad homenium; the loser's tool. You know you have an indefensable poaition here, which is why you are not answering the question and throwung around non sequiers and insults.

@Mandlbaur @ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling COAM omly applies to a lossless system. A ball on a string is lossy. It is illogical to compare the two and derive a conclusion. That is your error.

@spinnyastro @ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling Correct so I don’t. “Lossy” is subjective though so impossibly high standards is insane

@Mandlbaur @ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling This is incorrect. Losses (i.e. external torques) can be quantified. They are not subjective.

@Mandlbaur @lorenafreed @ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @Ferrari_ball @grok @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling Your video shows the ball stopping. 100% energy loss! That is not lossless

@lorenafreed @spinnyastro @ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @Ferrari_ball @grok @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling A ball on a string can only be described as lossy by A mentally deficient reasoning person

@Mandlbaur @ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling Comparing a lossless theory with a lossy system is a logical error.

@spinnyastro @ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling Identify this hole in the conclusion section then, or stop lying.

@Mandlbaur @sleenastevens @ItSpinsFaster @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling Principa does not mention angular momentum. You are refering to an old edition, not the latest edition. Principa doesnt have editions. You are making a false analogy.

@spinnyastro @sleenastevens @ItSpinsFaster @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling I can refer to effing principia if I like. This is bullshit.

@Mandlbaur @sleenastevens @ItSpinsFaster @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling If you refer to a reference work, shpuld you refer to the latest edition, or an older editi9n?

@sleenastevens @ItSpinsFaster @spinnyastro @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling Bringing up other textbooks is shifting the goalposts logical fallacy. To review my proof, it is necessary to refer to my textbook. This text does not fault the prior text.

@Mandlbaur @ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling But your manuscript doesn't do that. It has a logical hole that you could drive a train through.

@spinnyastro @ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling The evidence that I can predict my prototypes lies in the fact that I have managed to write an infallible proof which trivially falsifies existing theory.

@Mandlbaur @ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling Where is the evidence that you can predict your prototypes? Where is the peer reviewed manuscript that a 3d printed marble drop will do anything apart from convert potential energy to kinetic energy?

@spinnyastro @ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling I am correct. And simply accusing me of dishonesty and neglecting my proof which cannot be faulted, is plain and simple ad hominem.

@Mandlbaur @ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling So you think your book is always correct?

@ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @spinnyastro @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling The textbook describes a real system as does prof Young. This is lies.

@Mandlbaur @ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling Your textbook also allows you ignore air resistamce for things jumping out of aeroplanes. Is that always true as well?

@Mandlbaur @ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling Ah yes, your unpublished, unverified "prototypes". Appeal to authority logical fallacy; argument rejected.

@ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @spinnyastro @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling I am correct. I know because I learned to predict my prototypes and my predictions are accurate and COAM makes useless predictions and the problem here is an overinflated ego which cannot admit being wrong.

@Mandlbaur @ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling I agree, your problem is that you have an over inflated ego which cannot admit being wrong

@Ferrari_ball @Mandlbaur @sleenastevens @ItSpinsFaster @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling In the ten years he's apparently been doing this, he could have stopped Being Wrong On the Internet, and learnt sufficient physics to understand it. Most undergrads, if they apply themselves can get a physics degree in 4 years, and a PhD in another 3 or 4.

@spinnyastro @Mandlbaur @sleenastevens @ItSpinsFaster @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling Do you really expect John to understand any of the formulas (not to speak about the ideas) in Noether's theorems? Would you e.g. ask a toddler what the square root of i (the imaginary number) is?

@Mandlbaur @sleenastevens @ItSpinsFaster @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling And you do none of these for Noether's (peer reviewed) paper. Where's the fault in Noether's maths? Where's the "illogic" in Noether's maths?

@spinnyastro @sleenastevens @ItSpinsFaster @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling Nope. I demand that they fault the maths, or show illogic, or show peer reviewed experiment which confirms 12000 rpm

@Mandlbaur @ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling No, your argument is wrong, because you get confused when someone says "no external torque"

@spinnyastro @ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling Because my argument is infallible

@Mandlbaur @ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling If I tell you that your argument is idiotic, and so that is a valid rejection, you will shout and scream "ad homenium". Stop being a hypocrit.

@spinnyastro @ItSpinsFaster @sleenastevens @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling Nope. Ad hominem is when the person presenting an argument is being attacked. My pointing out that the argument is idiotic is valid reject

@Mandlbaur @sleenastevens @ItSpinsFaster @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling You demand that people fault your maths. Hypocrit.

@spinnyastro @sleenastevens @ItSpinsFaster @Ferrari_ball @grok @lorenafreed @tarapatton555 @logic_quantum @simonmaechling I can reject anything that does not agree with experiment