[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 1.29 MB, 2040x3530, FCD059F0-B6F2-46EF-94D5-C3196A900FB4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14869432 No.14869432 [Reply] [Original]

Is there any pure scienctific studies for only knowledge anymore or are all the studies and discoveries for money or some kind of gain?

>> No.14869766

>>14869432
>pure scienctific studies for only knowledge
james webb space telescope
large hadron collider
tweetney discovering the limits of female reproductive anatomy flexibility

>> No.14870324
File: 27 KB, 750x755, JWST pic.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14870324

>>14869766
jwst is a massive financial swindle thinly disguised as a science project

>> No.14870546

>>14869432
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pcjBxNBmKA

>> No.14870810

>>14869432
Here is a study that is busy ruining me financially because people are hostile towards me about it, so it is purely about science and costing me dearly.
http://www.baur-research.com/Physics/

>> No.14870850

>>14870810
Do you have any footage of experiments you've been carrying out?

>> No.14870861

>>14870850
I have independent confirmation footage : http://www.baur-research.com/Physics/measure.html

>> No.14870863

>>14870850
You are the one without any evidence.

>> No.14871972

>>14870810
Could you have the string hit another pole? Reducing the radius without having to add acceleration due to pulling through the loop. Angular momentum is very interesting to me. May I ask what the implications of your idea are?

>> No.14872014

>>14870810
>>14871972
Or rather than just a pole some other sort of device that would prevent the string from simply wrapping around and continuing to apply an identical centripetal force.

>> No.14872088

>>14870810
I was watching another one of your videos where you said that centrifugal force is called imaginary only by fools, that it is an equal opposite reaction, is not the equal opposite force exerted orthogonally to the radial path, similarly to the path of inertia causing the apparent outward force? I would greatly like to discuss these things with you in depth,

>> No.14873399

>>14871972
You could and it would still show that angular energy is conserved and not angular momentum because angular momentum is not conserved in reality.

>> No.14873403

>>14872014
There is no wrapping in the ball on a string demonstration. The thread is pulled through a small tube held in the hand. Also, there is very little difference in behavior from being pulled through a tube or wrapping. Both examples conserve angular energy and falsified conservation of angular momentum.

>> No.14873405

>>14872088
It is very obvious that if we apply centripetal force (which there is no contest to), that Newton’s third law dictates there is an equal and opposite force.
Claiming that the equal and opposite force is “imaginary” is literally insane.

Nothing to discuss.

Just accept the fact.

>> No.14873407

>>14871972
The “implications” are in rebuttal number 11 here : https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357302312_Rebuttals

>> No.14873852

>>14873405
What I am saying is not that no equal and opposite reaction is taking place but rather that the equal and opposite force is not occurring outwardly from the centripetal force, it is occurring orthogonally to the radial path opposite the direction of motion.

>> No.14873856

>>14873407
If you are correct, would this explain why there is no apparent centrifugal force caused by our rotation on the planet? I have been wondering about this for a while. If you are not on the equator the centrifugal force of the planets spin would not be vertical to you but off at an angle. I would be curious to hear your thoughts on this.

>> No.14873897

>>14869432
all scientific studies are made for some kind of gain. Money is usually the one, but more often than not ego and power come into the mix in the form of accolades, achievements and job positions for discoveries. Notoriety comes with any kind of discovery.

>> No.14874077

>>14873852
Well then you are talking complete incoherent nonsense which directly contradicts Newton’s third law.

>> No.14874082

>>14873856
It is at an angle. That is the cause of Coriolis.

>> No.14874119

>>14874077
I find your language more charged than it ought to be for a physics question. Also in your marble experiment the marbles exit the contraption at the same speed because they are no longer going in their radial path. The increase in speed is purely in respect to rotation rather than in respect to velocity.

Please explain further why I am flawed in reasoning the opposite reaction to be orthogonal rather than outward from the centripetal force. Does it not stand to reason that the opposite reaction would take place opposite to the motion of the object?

>> No.14874154

>>14874077
I am also curious as to how you began working on these ideas, you said you had a number of projects that we not lining up with the math?

>> No.14875474

>>14874119
Your language is pseudoscience so why would I not be charged by your evasion. If you expect me to remain calm and relaxed while you personally insult me in evasion of my work then you are the nutcase.

>> No.14876329

>>14875474
Brother I am asking for a more precise explanation, I truly am all ears when it comes to your work, I just require a bit of clarification.

>> No.14876387

>>14875474
I am sure that it is frustrating to have people discount your findings and ideas, but truly I am very curious as to what you are saying, accusing me of pseudoscience and insulting you is not helping you to explain.

>> No.14876464

>>14876329
Then stop telling me about your assessment of how “charged” I am which is ad hominem, btw, and ask about what you do not understand.

>> No.14876469

>>14876387
If you honestly cannot read my writing, then address this different but typed paper: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/363284556_Light_Has_Mass

>> No.14876484

>>14869432
what have you got against gain?
commie faggot
what have you discovered?
go spend 20 years in a room trying to discover something for my benefit
go on
ANYONE WHO WOULD DEVALUE SCIENCE IN SUCH A WAY
DOESN'T VALUE SCIENCE

>> No.14876494

>>14876484
Anyone who neglects the fact that a ball on a string demonstration of conservation of angular momentum does not do 12000 rpm, does not value science.

>> No.14876679

>>14876464
I do not understand why I would be incorrect to accredit centrifugal force to the path of inertia going outward from the centripetal force and that the opposite reaction is accounted for simply by the force required to move the object in it's angular path, that is that the opposite reaction is orthogonal to the path of motion.

>> No.14876742

>>14869432
over 99% of all academic publications are falsified. financial concerns are the reason for the falsification. all peer reviewed publication can be assumed to be false
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis

>> No.14876759

>>14876679
You can do whatever you like with your orthogonality but an equal and opposite reaction is equal and opposite, by definition. Your delusional bullshit is delusional and bullshit.