Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • TalkRational: shut up you house atheists

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - uncool

Politics and Current Events / J20 prosecution
Second round seems to be slowly going against the government. Thread:
Sports / Re: Lol fuck the nfl
It was not unanimous amongst owners.  NY Jets did not support it.
Damnit, you're right; I should know not to trust Goodell by now. From ESPN:
Goodell said the vote was "unanimous" among owners, although San Francisco 49ers owner Jed York said he abstained. York said that all owners that voted in in the process supported the change.
Doesn't say who abstained.
Science / Re: The Tides ... Take 5
For anyone else reading, the speed of a water wave is normally computed ignoring friction
The problem with you two idiots is the stupid shit you claim turns up no search results at all.  Because it's only you claiming it.

"the speed of a water wave is normally computed ignoring friction"
Are you joking with this link?
Science / Re: The Tides ... Take 5
Your link got broken.
Well yours works.  Anything to say about the really obvious problem of some internet crank claiming bottom friction isn't a valid term?

Not really, since that hasn't happened.
Politics and Current Events / Re: Trumpocalypse
lol they gave j-kush permanent security clearance

Hands up if you're surprised.


Let me ask you two specific versions of the question from step 2.

In both cases, the object and the affected mass of air will have mass 2 kg. The battery starts with 10000 J (i.e. enough to power anything relevant).

 In the first version:
The object starts at 10 m/s, and ends at 11 m/s. The wind moves at 5 m/s.

Second version:
The object starts at 10 m/s, and ends at 11 m/s. The wind moves at 15 m/s.

In both versions: how much energy does the battery have at the end?
Sports / Re: Lol fuck the nfl
Or are you saying the battery is used (discharged) in order to increase speed? That also greatly complicates matters.
That is a part of what I'm saying; the battery changes by whatever is necessary to allow a process to happen while conserving energy. Braking, speeding up (or slowing down) in the wind, etc. It's a store of energy that can be added to or subtracted from, as whatever process is happening needs.

Essentially, I'm using a physically possible method as a bookkeeping technique.
2 things I'd point out:

1) You probably will want subscripts on your Es. Ei and Ee.
2) I think you mixed up numerator and denominator for m/M in the energy formula.

Please read the eta before moving to the next step.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

ETA: One second. I think I misread what you wrote. Are you saying that the amount of energy in the battery won't change?
Science / Re: The Tides ... Take 5
More substantively,

After you claimed the term "bottom friction" was wrong
This description is inaccurate. Here's cold one's original post:
it's not friction that determines or limits the shallow water free wave speed.
OMG it's like you know nothing about waves at all

It's actually called bottom friction

You dumbass

That link is wrong, or rather, using "friction" in an inexact sense.  But explaining this to you is as pointless as explaining it to a houseplant.

For anyone else reading, the speed of a water wave is normally computed ignoring friction, and the result (which scales as the square root of the water depth when the wavelength is longer than the depth) is exact in the approximation of uniform depth, no friction, etc.  Details are here for instance

To summarize: cold one said the link used the term incorrectly.
Science / Re: The Tides ... Take 5
Your link got broken.

Punctuation like quotes need to be replaced with a % followed by their ascii number (" is %22) in queries, if I remember correctly.
Sports / Re: Lol fuck the nfl
im not keeping up with sports, what happend now?
New rule, everyone stands for the anthem or stays in the locker room. Apparently unanimous among the owners, which will leave them really popular among the players. Fine is to the team, not to the individual, though the team can then fine the player.
Sports / Lol fuck the nfl
Bets on how long before the first fine is assessed?
It is clearly not a direct quote of what Clapper said and not meant to be.
What was it meant to be, then?

Just a random fantasy quote?
Rhetoric where he rephrases what someone else said in the worst possible light. The quote marks show where he stops rephrasing and starts responding. The idea is that what's in the quotes should be essentially the same as what was actually said, except that the objectionable parts should be more obvious.

This has been done many times here to Dave and to socrates.
Ok. Then I'll answer the question.

The final velocity of the affected portion of air will be vw - (m/M) (ve - vi), by conservation of momentum. Correspondingly, the energy in the battery will be:

E - (1/2)(m ve^2 + M (vw - (m/M)(ve - vi))^2 - m vi^2 - M vw^2)

by conservation of energy.

I think this is likely to be one of two major places we could disagree.

Did you skip a few steps? What is M and what is vw?
They are the variables from the next question I asked:
I do. It is in 3 or 4 parts. That was the first.

The second also works by asking a question.

Assume (for the sake of calculation) that all reactions are loss-free. We have an object in the wind with mass m, starting at velocity vi. The wind has velocity vw. Using a system that uses as little energy as possible, the object accelerates to velocity ve, changing the velocity of a portion of air with total mass M. The battery in the object started with energy E. How much energy should it have at the end?

I did it a different way from you, relying on my knowledge of physics (specifically, kinetics). I can demonstrate it your way, if you want.
Check your signs in the expansion for the last step.
Quote marks can be used for rhetoric. I was on the other side of something similar with socrates a few years ago. Can't seem to find it now.

Isn't rhetoric and hyperbole the same thing? I am not entirely sure.
Hyperbole specifically refers to going "over the top", or exaggeration - hence the "hyper". Rhetoric can mean any figure of speech. So understatement would be rhetoric, but not hyperbole.
It is clearly not a direct quote of what Clapper said and not meant to be.
Clearly to us, after having seen the actual quote, yes.
Quote marks can be used for rhetoric. I was on the other side of something similar with socrates a few years ago. Can't seem to find it now. He said something absurd, I paraphrased it in a way that pointed out the absurdity using quotes, and he threw a tantrum.
I missed this earlier.
Another question for uncool:

Do you think  the claimed "transform" from a cart that is on a treadmill, to a cart on a road in a wind, is a Galilean transform?

Feel free to state your reasons why or why not.

That should be enough to get the discussion started.
I have stated before, certainly to humber and I believe to you, that in the sense we would usually think of a road, no. The Galilean transform technically takes a treadmill to a treadmill, and usually a treadmill is not what we think of as a road.

That approximation requires the idea that the belt and a road will give approximately equal forces. Which I think to be accurate, likely to within the sensitivity necessary.

Talk to me. I don't know any humber.

The transform being claimed by the carters (and you are one of them) from a cart on a treadmill belt to a cart on a road in the wind, is NOT a Galilean transform. Can you bring yourself to state the obvious fact, without equivocating and trying to place conditions on your answer?
I did state it, as precisely as I thought necessary. I will do so again: the Galilean transform does not change a treadmill into anything that is not a treadmill; the change to (what we usually think of as) a road requires a separate argument, based on approximations.
Yeah, it is just great that the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign, right?

If it was the other way around you would be calling for an investigation and impeachment.

Like, if then candidate Trump somehow managed to get a mole to infiltrate the White House?   What the fuck is wrong with you?

The appropriate "other way around" would be Trump, say, having Robby Mook report to him.


If we take, as an assumption, the assertion that there was no distinction between the Obama administration and the Clinton campaign.
Huh. Didn't know huffpo had entirely separate sites for mobile and computer. Mobile goes to, computer to Remove the m from and it says the internet disconnected, which is bizarre.
The tweets usually embed, allowing us to see them without clicking them. You may have some setting disabling that.

First tweet:

Breaking news: The ACLU is suing Ohio to strike down the state's congressional map, saying it is so severely gerrymandered to benefit Republicans that it violates the U.S. Constitution ( )

Secoond tweet:

Ohio Gov. John Kasich, who signed this plan into law, has been one of the Republican officials very outspoken about stopping partisan gerrymandering. He joined a brief in October asking SCOTUS to do something.

ACLU points to this over and over in their filing
This is a point where I do want to stop and check if you agree so far; as I said, that is one of two points where I think we could disagree.
And Heinz: I'm breaking it down into parts for my comprehension as well. It makes it easier for me to check my work.