sci.astro
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Ballistic Theory and the Sagnac Experiment

Subject: Re: Ballistic Theory and the Sagnac Experiment
From: "George Dishman"
Date: 19 Mar 2006 01:46:27 -0800
Newsgroups: sci.astro, sci.physics.relativity, sci.physics
Hexenmeister wrote:
> "George Dishman" <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1142413698.877653.230420@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> |
> | Hexenmeister wrote:
> | > "George Dishman" <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> | > news:1142355863.685666.125560@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> | > |
> | > | Hexenmeister wrote:
> | > | > "George Dishman" <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> | > | > news:1142115577.088238.150550@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> | > | > |
> | > | > | Hexenmeister wrote:
> | > | > | > "George Dishman" <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> | > | > | > news:1141998013.337852.323650@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> | > | > | > > Hexenmeister wrote:
> | > | > | > >> "George Dishman" <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> | > | > | > >> news:1141982182.030916.184630@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> | > | > | > >> >
> | > | > | > >> > jgreenfield@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> | > | > | > >> >> Hexenmeister wrote:
> | > | > | > >> >> > "jgreenfield@xxxxxxxxxxx" <jgreen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
> | > message
> | > | > | > >> >> >
> | > news:1141707597.080011.317850@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> | > | > | > >> >> >
> | > | > | > >> >> > > The animation is a fantasia.
> | > | > | > >> >> >
> | > | > | > >> >> > Its not a fantasia, it is an accurate model.
> | > | > | > >> >> >
> | > | > | > >> >> >   http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/lie.GIF
> | > | > | > >> >> >
> | > | > | > >> >> > Rifleman 4's bullet has travelled 300 pixels in the same
> | > time as
> | > | > | > >> >> > rifleman 1's bullet has travelled 80 pixels.
> | > | > | > >> >> > Therefore the speed of bullets is 30 pixels/time and 8
> | > | > pixels/time,
> | > | > | > >> >> > and not 12 pixels/frame as Relf claimed.
> | > | > | > >> >> > That's the lie and fantasia, not the animation.
> | > | > | > >> >
> | > | > | > >> > I extracted two consecutive frames to check the speeds:
> | > | > | > >> >
> | > | > | > >> > http://www.georgedishman.f2s.com/Henri/frame_11_to_12.png
> | > | > | > >> >
> | > | > | > >> > The displacements match Jeff's values. I haven't checked
> | > | > | > >> > any more pairs (there are 93 frames in the gif) but the
> | > | > | > >> > speeds look constant by eye.
> | > | > | > >> >
> | > | > | > >> > George
> | > | > | > >>
> | > | > | > >> LOL!
> | > | > | > >> The speed of riflemen 3 doesn't look constant by my eye,
> | > | > | > >
> | > | > | > > Jeff wrote in
> | > | > | > >
> http://groups.google.co.uk/group/sci.astro/msg/a0cdfd044de5fd71
> | > | > | > >>
> | > | > | > >> ... the speeds of the bullets relative to the targets are:
> | > | > | > >          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> | > | > | > >>
> | > | > | > >> 1)  8 pixels per frame
> | > | > | > >> 2) 12 pixels per frame
> | > | > | > >> 3)  8 pixels per frame
> | > | > | > >> 4) 12 pixels per frame
> | > | > | > >
> | > | > | > > The speeds are of the bullets, not the riflemen.
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > Hey moron, the bullets are in the gun most of the way,
> | > | > |
> | > | > | Hey clueless, the rest of us are talking about
> | > | > | the speed of the bullets AFTER they have been
> | > | > | fired.
> | > | >
> | > | > Oh, I thought you were discussing frequency.
> | > |
> | > | In that case you were clearly rambling when you wrote:
> | > | > | > >> >> > Rifleman 4's bullet has travelled 300 pixels in the same
> | > time as
> | > | > | > >> >> > rifleman 1's bullet has travelled 80 pixels.
> | > | > | > >> >> > Therefore the speed of bullets is 30 pixels/time and 8
> | > pixels/time,
> | > | > | > >> >> > and not 12 pixels/frame as Relf claimed.
> | > |
> | > | > Make up
> | > | > your bigoted mind.
> | > | >
> | > | >
> | > | > |
> | > | > | > travelling at 72 pixels per frame.
> | > | > |
> | > | > | ? You've definitely lost it.
> | > | >
> | > | > See diagram.
> | > | >
> | > | >
> | > | > | > > Bullets from riflemen 1 and 3 move from pixel 109
> | > | > | > > to 117, a shift of 8 pixels in one frame, while the
> | > | > | > > bullets from riflemen 2 and 4 move from pixel 137
> | > | > | > > to 149 or 12 pixels in one frame. Those are exactly
> | > | > | > > the numbers Jeff gave so your accusation appears
> | > | > | > > to be incorrect.
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > Bullshit.
> | > | > | >   http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/lie.GIF
> | > | > |
> | > | > | And which two frames was that made from?
> | > | >
> | > | > Target and bullet. See diagram, bigot.
> | > |
> | > | "Target and bullet" are in all the frames from 1 to 91
> | > | clueless, try again.
> | >
> | > Target and bullet are frames of reference
> |
> | "Pixels per frame" refers to consecutive frames in
> | the gif animation of course, not "pixels per frame
> | of reference".
>
> Ok, the bullets inside the guns (using the two frames 0 and 10) ...

The software I'm using numbers from 1 so they
are 1 and 11 in my diagram.

> ...travel at 72 pixels per frame, carried by the riflemen.

 http://www.georgedishman.f2s.com/Henri/more_frames.png

Between those frames, the gun for rifleman 4 moves
35 pixels in 10 frames or 3.5ppf. That consists of
7 pixels in the first 3 frames (while he is accelerating)
up to frame 4 where the first bullet is fired and then
28 pixels in the next 7 frames, at rate as Jeff said of
4 pixels per frame.

The second bullet is fired in frame 19 and between
frame 4 and frame 19 the gun moves 60 pixels, again
4 pixels per frame.

> | > , shithead. Try again.
> |
> | You are certainly exhibiting the symptoms.
> |
> | > | >   http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/lie.GIF
> | > |
> | > | Had another go have you? It shows the slope of
> | > | the blue and black lines as 8 ppf and of the red
> | > | and green lines as 12 ppf, just as Jeff said.
> | >
> | >
> | > Of course. It ALSO shows 72 ppf,
> |
> | Yes, a value which points to a line which
> | illustrates the speed of the gun, and which
> | is also obviously wrong. You seem to have
> | divided by "4" for the four "frames of
> | reference", number of riflemen, instead of
> | more than 50 frames in the gif that it takes
> | for that movement. The distance of 300
> | isn't even right, it is about 210 pixels to
> | the gun depending on your point of
> | reference.
>
> Ok, I did my sums wrong, I wondered if you'd notice.
> But clearly the speed of bullets is greater than 8 or 12 ppf,

The speed of the bullets after they leave the
gun is 8ppf and 12 ppf as I showed before:

 http://www.georgedishman.f2s.com/Henri/frame_11_to_12.png

If the rifleman was moving at 72ppf, he would
outpace the bullet and get shot in the back!

> so Relf lied. Why don't you straighten his ignorant arse
> out instead of congratulating him, prejudiced phuckwit?

Because the speeds are exactly what he said
they were. You did your sums wrong so I
straightened you out. I got one wrong myself
the other day and "Odysseus" straightened me
out, to err is human, no big deal.

> | > which Relf, (who likes to use
> | > a reversed "R" in his name like my granddaughter who is 12 years old
> | > and immature), is blind to.
> |
> | You appear to be blind too, it was posted
> | by Jeff Root.
>
> Ok. I don't mind be corrected. I rarely bother reading shit
> from either one of them anyway.  I happened to come
> across a good animation followed by a  ing lie,
> Root was trying to be a smartarse and failed miserably.
> You wanted to howl at Wilson ...

Actually Henry was OK, it is Jim who keeps
saying that Doppler shift can only occur if there
is a difference in the kinetic energy when the
bullet hits the target. Check how often he talks
about the penetration into the target. That is
what I was trying to correct and Jeff illustrated.

> ... so you joined the flock,
> making you a sheep in wolf's clothing, but I can eat you alive
> and burp the remainder. Find me wrong and I'll admit to it,
> you won't catch me defending my own  up in a futile
> attempt to save face, that's pointless.

Well I've shown you the evidence so we'll see
if you are good to your word. Jeff's animation
has both the bullets and the guns moving at
the speeds he stated.

> | > | > | You screwed up A, just apologise to Jeff.
> | > | >
> | > | >  ... the speeds of the bullets relative to the targets are:
> | > | >           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> | > | >
> | > | > 1)  8 pixels per frame
> | > | > 2) 12 pixels per frame
> | > | > 3)  80 pixels per frame
> | > | > 4)  72 pixels per frame
> | > | >
> | > | > Jeff  ed up and so did you. The diagram proves it, as do
> | > | > the counters at the targets. Apologise to me, I've got you dead
> | > | > wrong.
> | > |
> | > | It appears you don't even understand your
> | > | own diagram, you just proved him right.
> | >
> | > You don't know the meaning of the word "proof",
> |
> | I showed you the proof:
> |
> | http://www.georgedishman.f2s.com/Henri/frame_11_to_12.png
> |
> | > immature shithead.
> |
> | You're the one who has to resort to infantile
> | name-calling A. Still, you couldn't work out
> | who posted the animation, you can't tell the
> | difference between a "frame of reference" and
> | a frame in an animated gif, you quoted the
> | speed of the gun instead of the speed of the
> | bullet and you couldn't even get the value of
> | that correct. I guess name-calling is all you
> | have left.
>
> As I said, I'll stand corrected. Now you correct Root,
> you congratulated him on a  up and became a party to it.

As yet I haven't found anything to correct, I will
do so if I find anything, I think I have in the past.

George


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>