From: pnn@pnn.org
On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 12:22:01 -0700, Vincent Maycock
wrote:
>On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 14:41:27 GMT, E.Laureti
> wrote:
>
>>
>>jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) posted:
>>
>>> ERROR "unexpected byte sequence starting at index 287: '\xE2'" while
decoding:
>>>
>>> In article <0001HW.2E54AA9A0031F5CB70000253B38F@news.supernews.com>,
>>> WolfFan wrote:
>>> >On Aug 19, 2025, Von Ottone wrote
>>> >(in article<54n8ak9iq1pa8cnl33lngo12c2qegdaci8@4ax.com>):
>>> >
>>> >> Envy is a nasty beast; it makes you jealous and clouds your mind.
>>> >
>>> >You still canâ??t lift one kilo one meter for one minute.
>>> >
>>> >Note that, according to your own â??figuresâ??, if you lifted a working
fluid
>>> >(water, for instance) and then let it fall past a turbine, the power.
>>> >generated would exceed the power required to lift the working fluid.
Thatâ??s
>>> >a perpetual motion machine of the second type. Which is impossible. Your
>>> >machine simply cannot work, and never will. Youâ??re simply a bunch of con
>>> >artists trying on a scam.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Disclaimer: I don't think this device works at all but if it did. I am
>>> sufficiently confident in the conservation laws
>>
>>usi il traduttore .
>>Il dettaglio essenziale che non nota č che le leggi di conservazione
newoniane
>>sono state elaborate senza conoscere la forza di Lorentz su cui si basa la
PNN.
>>E poi dimentica che la fisica ha origini sperimentali
>>e tutto si deve piegare SEMPRE all'esperimento.
>>Ho sempre detto che le leggi di conservazione di Newton vanno poi
>>interpretate con l'inserimento dell'elettrodinamica che Newton neppure
conosceva.
>>E' un compito che lascio ad altri
>>Mi occupo di fare BENE solo gli esperimenti e di mostrarli agli increduli.
>>L'uso ossessivo della meccanica newtoniana per la propulsione in
astronautica
>>ci preclude ogni colonizzazione dello spazio come la reatŕ finora dimostra
brutalmente.
>
>That is,
>
>>"use the translator. The essential detail that you do not notice is that
Newtonian conservation
>>laws were developed without knowing the Lorentz force on which PNN is based.
>
>No, the Lorentz force is quite consistent with Newtonian dynamics. And
>Newtonian conservation laws were derived from first principles by Emmy
>Noether some time after special relativity was developed.
>
>>And then you forget that physics has experimental origins and that
>>everything must always bend to the experiment.
>
>But experiment must be consistent with previously verified theory.
>
>> I have always said that Newton's conservation laws must then be interpreted
>>with the inclusion of electrodynamics, which Newton did not even know.
>
>Which led to relativity, not perpetual motion machines or whatever
>you're trying to do.
>
>> It is a task
>>that I leave to others. I focus on doing experiments WELL and showing them
to the skeptics.
>>The obsessive use of Newtonian mechanics for propulsion in astronautics
precludes
>>any colonization of space, as reality has so far brutally demonstrated.
>
>So because you want to travel through space, Newtonian mechanics
>*must* be wrong?
>
>>>that my first question
>>> on seeing it work (after checking for invisible fishing line or cgi)
>>> would be to wonder from what source the motive energy is being drawn.
>>>
>>> (It's never tachyons. It would be cool if it was tachyons, except
>>> for the whole "universes with tachyons may not be stable" deal)
>>>
>>>
Bhuahahahahahahaha
You are so fun!
You think that you know more than Laureti about PNN...
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
