Go stand in the corner, Chris

This is the place for any magazine-related discussions that don't fit in any of the column discussion boards below.
terri
Posts: 404
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 1:01 am
Location: colorado
Contact:

Go stand in the corner, Chris

Post by terri » Sun Sep 25, 2005 5:41 am

Ihis is at least the third "cycle" of Chris' misbehavior that I've noticed, where he gets extrememly unruly and abusive, other members finally jump all over him, and he then calms down and becomes a real value to this board. He is apparently in the latter part of ths cycle right now, his last few posts being more "socialized" and more lucid than for the past couple of weeks.<p>I am a firm believer in the adage: "Rights --you use them or lose them. But you abuse them and you lose them, too."<p>I am also a firm believer in free speech, but abuses like the ones Chris has exhibited should not be tolerated. Every community has the right to govern itself according to its own standards, and I believe it might be desireable to limit Chris' "right" to free speech by petitioning the webmaster to ban him from the board for a certain period (two weeks might be appropriate) the next time he starts in with his rather arrogant and overbearing posts which do not contribute anything to the board.<p>It is obvious that Nuts & Volts finds it a good business strategy to sponsor this free board, but if the board loses its functioning capability because of one of its members, who apparently has more time on his hands than is good for him, then this business advantage is lost.<p>I therefore propose that the next time Chris starts "acting up," that we present a petition to the webmaster to ban his posts for a given period.<p>In other words, he should be told to "go stand in the corner" the next time he starts exhibiting this pattern of behavior. <p>I believe the best evidence in favor of this possible solution will be found in his response to this post.<p>Respectfully submitted,<p>Terri A Travis<p>[ September 25, 2005: Message edited by: terri ]</p>
terri wd0edw

User avatar
jwax
Posts: 2201
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 1:01 am
Location: NY
Contact:

Re: Go stand in the corner, Chris

Post by jwax » Sun Sep 25, 2005 6:03 am

Or, simply "respond" to any of his posts with "Ignore".
My guess is the magazine loves the continual increase in forum activity, indicating a success, without noted its deteriorating content.
We must look like squabbling schoolboys to newcomers. :(

terri
Posts: 404
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 1:01 am
Location: colorado
Contact:

Re: Go stand in the corner, Chris

Post by terri » Sun Sep 25, 2005 6:18 am

"We must look like squabbling schoolboys to newcomers."<p>Exactly. Whence my suggestion.
terri wd0edw

User avatar
Chris Smith
Posts: 4325
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Bieber Ca.

Re: Go stand in the corner, Chris

Post by Chris Smith » Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:31 am

Are you still whining from that one you took in the rear end, teri?<p>Some more class room time ehh for you ehh?<p>[Page 155 Introduction to Physics]<p>The quantity for mass is E=Mc Square and this is the kinetic energy of an object. <p>This representation if Kinetic energy is valid at any speed. <p>When ever the energy of an object is increased, the mass of the object increases. <p>If a body is lifted in the earths gravitational field so that its potential energy is increased, the increase in energy is related to the increase in mass of the body by E=Mc square. <p>Mass and energy are directly related through the factor C square, thus it may be regarded as the energy of the object is a result of the mass of the object. <p>Stop whining teri, you sound like a child who just lost his marbles.

User avatar
jwax
Posts: 2201
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 1:01 am
Location: NY
Contact:

Re: Go stand in the corner, Chris

Post by jwax » Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:37 am

Ignore

User avatar
Chris Smith
Posts: 4325
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Bieber Ca.

Re: Go stand in the corner, Chris

Post by Chris Smith » Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:54 am

Or learn?

User avatar
philba
Posts: 2050
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 1:01 am
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: Go stand in the corner, Chris

Post by philba » Sun Sep 25, 2005 1:52 pm

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Chris Smith:
Are you still whining from that one you took in the rear end, teri?<p>Some more class room time ehh for you ehh?<p>[Page 155 Introduction to Physics]<p>The quantity for mass is E=Mc Square and this is the kinetic energy of an object. <p>This representation if Kinetic energy is valid at any speed. <p>When ever the energy of an object is increased, the mass of the object increases. <p>If a body is lifted in the earths gravitational field so that its potential energy is increased, the increase in energy is related to the increase in mass of the body by E=Mc square. <p>Mass and energy are directly related through the factor C square, thus it may be regarded as the energy of the object is a result of the mass of the object. <p>Stop whining teri, you sound like a child who just lost his marbles.<hr></blockquote><p>OK, this is for anyone who might actually believe that blather. I know chris will just insult my education or logic or ...<p>Lets take an object of mass M traveling at velocity V (in our frame of reference). its kinetic energy KE is defined by the formula KE = MV²/2. So now, double the velocity of the object to 2V. Plugging this into the KE formula gives us KE = M2V². This quadruples the kinetic energy. Since you claim that E=MC² defines the energy of the object, then the object's mass has just quadrupled. The fallacy in this is that E=MC² has nothing to do with the kinetic energy of the object. That is solely a function of Mass and Velocity with velocity being the dominant factor.

terri
Posts: 404
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 1:01 am
Location: colorado
Contact:

Re: Go stand in the corner, Chris

Post by terri » Sun Sep 25, 2005 1:56 pm

What's really tragically funny about this is that I never once mentioned anything about mass/velocity relationships.<p>He's got me mixed up with someone else.<p>I mentioned that his response to this topic would be the best evidence of the abuse of his right of free speech.<p>Chris. See your doctor.<p>And go stand in the corner.<p>[ September 25, 2005: Message edited by: terri ]</p>
terri wd0edw

User avatar
Chris Smith
Posts: 4325
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Bieber Ca.

Re: Go stand in the corner, Chris

Post by Chris Smith » Sun Sep 25, 2005 2:10 pm

Philba, arguing with a physics book makes you just down right silly. <p>Is there a purpose to it? <p>Do you want to win so bad at all cost that you would stick your foot in your mouth just to get air time? <p>Page 155 paragraph 4 on....<p>"The quantity for mass is E=Mc Square and this is the kinetic energy of an object. <p>This representation if Kinetic energy is valid at any speed. <p>When ever the energy of an object is increased, the mass of the object increases"<p>So what part dont you still get? <p>
Read the words and learn, and just accept the fact that you don’t have a clue and I do, and I have the physics books to back up every word I have posted. <p>Give up while your behind, you lost now, lets move onto another subject.<p> But remember, don’t challenge someone unless you have done your home work properly, not half ass like some of the posters. <p>You cant win when your wrong and you cant rewrite the physics books so just settle down and learn something new each day. The lesson for today was simple, you got it wrong.<p>And your right Terri, Will was the wishful thinker who said "only in Einsteinian Physics " but neither of you so far have admitted that your have been playing with your self when it comes to physics. You prefer to attack instead of learn. I have posted many words here in this post, all true. So, did you learn anything other than sticking your foot in your mouth and getting it wrong?<p>[ September 25, 2005: Message edited by: Chris Smith ]</p>

rshayes
Posts: 1286
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2003 1:01 am
Contact:

Re: Go stand in the corner, Chris

Post by rshayes » Sun Sep 25, 2005 2:28 pm

"The quantity for mass is E=Mc Square and this is the kinetic energy of an object."<p>The KINETIC energy of an object is given by:<p>KE = (1/2) m v^2<p>This is covered in high school physics.<p>So far we have learned that Chris has not even completed a high school physics course.

User avatar
dr_when
Posts: 208
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2004 1:01 am
Location: Milwaukee
Contact:

Re: Go stand in the corner, Chris

Post by dr_when » Sun Sep 25, 2005 4:25 pm

So much for standing in the corner. :mad:
"Who is John Galt?"

User avatar
Chris Smith
Posts: 4325
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Bieber Ca.

Re: Go stand in the corner, Chris

Post by Chris Smith » Sun Sep 25, 2005 5:07 pm

Still arguing with the books ehh steven/ phil?<p>Remember to print this out on soft tissue paper.<p>http://img270.imageshack.us/my.php?image=eequals4ev.png<p>
Introduction to Physics, page 155 for Scientists and Engineers....<p>
The quantity for mass is E=Mc Square and this is the kinetic energy of an object. <p>This representation of Kinetic energy is valid at any speed. <p>When ever the energy of an object is increased, the mass of the object increases"<p>So what part dont you still get?<p>Thank you for revealing your source book and last level of education. I told you you were playing with your self.<p>[ September 25, 2005: Message edited by: Chris Smith ]</p>

terri
Posts: 404
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 1:01 am
Location: colorado
Contact:

Re: Go stand in the corner, Chris

Post by terri » Sun Sep 25, 2005 7:17 pm

You're a sick man, Chris. Go see a doctor.
terri wd0edw

User avatar
Chris Smith
Posts: 4325
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Bieber Ca.

Re: Go stand in the corner, Chris

Post by Chris Smith » Sun Sep 25, 2005 7:37 pm

Is that your way of saying your sorry for getting it wrong, and attacking the physics book? <p>I accept your apology Terri, I don’t know if the book will forgive you though?

rshayes
Posts: 1286
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2003 1:01 am
Contact:

Re: Go stand in the corner, Chris

Post by rshayes » Sun Sep 25, 2005 7:55 pm

Chris has now demonstrated that he cannot even read a Physics text, let alone understand it.<p>I have heard of the formula:<p>E = m c^2.<p>It is quite famous. It is not the kinetic energy, as Chris claimed. It is Einsteins's formula for the rest energy of a mass. It is quite clearly labeled as such in the copy of the text that Chris provided. It only changes under extreme circumstances (nulear reactions, for example). As I understand it, the mass converted to energy in an atomic bomb explosion is a few grams. Somehow, no one has ever collected and weighed the reaction products to make sure.<p>Under normal conditions the kinetic energy is given by:<p>KE = (1/2) m v^2,<p>as also pointed out by Philba.<p>I might point out that this result can be derived in about five minutes using high school physics and high school algebra.<p>Under relativistic conditions, the mass in the kinetic energy expression is considered to increase with velocity.<p>m(v) = m(0)/sqrt(1-(v/c)^2)<p>The correction is negligable in most cases, since v is usually much less that c.<p>The total energy of an object is the sum of the kinetic energy, the potential energy, and the rest energy. Philba can probably elaborate on this, since he does have more extensive training in Physics.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 46 guests