Duration - You claimed that a photon accelerates. All of this ridiculous off-topic nonsense about pie does nothing to support your claim that a photon accelerates and EVER travels at anything other than c.

 

Every post you've made at this site is a trolls post.

Duration - You claimed that a photon accelerates. All of this ridiculous off-topic nonsense about pie does nothing to support your claim that a photon accelerates and EVER travels at anything other than c.

 

Every post you've made at this site is a trolls post.

 

Testimony to the fact that the math can be incorrect is ridiculous? You expect me to use a math that is wrong?

Wow... less than 60 seconds to reply. Nope... No trolls here.

1/4 == 25%

 

That is defined as such..

1/4 == 25%

 

That is defined as such..

 

So you have 25% of the pie if I give you a piece? LOL

Every post you've made at this site is a trolls post.

 

I agree.

So you have 25% of the pie if I give you a piece? LOL

You seem to be trying to prove that the math is wrong. It is not. If you give me a quarter of a pie, you gave me 25% of it. If you divided it into four unequal pieces and give me one, you do not give me 1/4 of a pie -- you give me 2/3 or 3/7 or whatever proportion the one piece you gave me is. The math is not broken.

 

So are you trying to prove that since math can be wrong, photons accelerate?

You seem to be trying to prove that the math is wrong. It is not. If you give me a quarter of a pie, you gave me 25% of it. If you divided it into four unequal pieces and give me one, you do not give me 1/4 of a pie -- you give me 2/3 or 3/7 or whatever proportion the one piece you gave me is. The math is not broken.

 

So are you trying to prove that since math can be wrong, photons accelerate?

 

My point precisely.

Assume nothing.

 

I didn't say equal pieces, I said four pieces. Not enough information? I gave you a fact that there is one pie divided into 4 pieces. That is one divided by four (1/4), correct?

 

Incorrect. Using are using two different meanings of "divided". The first is "common usage", where "divided" can result in unequal shares, and the second is the mathematical definition, where it cannot. You can't just simply intermix the two. This is merely word play and not a logical argument.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

If light travels at a velocity of 186,000 mi/sec, and it is 186,000 miles away from me after a one second duration, that means the light accelerated at a rate of 372,000 mi/sec^2. Isn't that just a tad greater than Einsteins E=MC^2, as according to that, light ACCELERATES at the rate of 186,000 mi/sec^2, which means it can only be 93,000 miles away after one second.

 

E=mc² says nothing about the acceleration of light. The c² is a conversion factor between mass and energy. Besides c² isn't even an acceleration as it is distance²/time² and acceleration is distance/time²

 

If a car passes me standing on the road and one minute later is one mile from me, I can't say that the car accelerated at 2 miles/min², because the car could have moving at 1 mile/min when it passed me and been traveling at 1mile/min the whole time and not accelerated at all.

Incorrect. Using are using two different meanings of "divided". The first is "common usage", where "divided" can result in unequal shares, and the second is the mathematical definition, where it cannot. You can't just simply intermix the two. This is merely word play and not a logical argument.

 

That is word play.

 

It is IMPOSSIBLE to cut a pie into four EQUAL pieces, so your 1/4=.25 is GARBAGE!

Why?

If a car passes me standing on the road and one minute later is one mile from me, I can't say that the car accelerated at 2 miles/min², because the car could have moving at 1 mile/min when it passed me and been traveling at 1mile/min the whole time and not accelerated at all.

 

When did you start the timer, when the car was at an exact point on the road in front of you?

 

Then your numbers are wrong, as the car is never at a specific point on the road at a specific "time," because the car was in motion, and it traveled x distance in x time. Break it down as far as you like, it will always be traveling at the rate of (say) 60 MPH, and you can't stop time!

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Why?

 

Distance.

Then your numbers are wrong, as the car is never at a specific point on the road at a specific "time," because the car was in motion, and it traveled x distance in x time. Break it down as far as you like, it will always be traveling at the rate of (say) 60 MPH, and you can't stop time!

Calculus.

 

Distance.

Do explain.

Edited March 21, 200916 yr by Cap'n Refsmmat
Consecutive posts merged.

Calculus.

 

 

Do explain.

 

I agree, that's the problem. I blame Newton!

 

What's to understand? You can not be precise enough to cut a pie into four exactly equal pieces.

 

Just because your eyes are bad and you THINK they're equal doesn't mean they are.

duration-congratulations on your invention of this new math where 1/4 does not equal .25.

perhaps this is why your physics is so flawed.

Okay, look, Mr. Enigmatic, you're never going to get a point across unless you decide to elaborate and explain. This Socratic question-and-answer style is getting you nowhere. Unless you decide to elucidate much more clearly, I'm just going to close this thread. It's clearly not going anywhere.

duration-congratulations on your invention of this new math where 1/4 does not equal .25.

perhaps this is why your physics is so flawed.

 

Perhaps that's why you subscribe to a false BB? Perhaps that's why you claim the universe has a finite volume? Perhaps that's why you say.......

 

LOL

 

Your math and science cracks me up. It is fun, though!

Perhaps that's why you subscribe to a false BB? Perhaps that's why you claim the universe has a finite volume? Perhaps that's why you say.......

 

LOL

 

Your math and science cracks me up. It is fun, though!

 

so you are also psychic? how do you know what i believe?

so you are also psychic? how do you know what i believe?

 

So you agree the universe has an infinite volume?

So you agree the universe has an infinite volume?

 

you can't argue with people by trying to stick words in their mouth. that is arguing with yourself.

you can't argue with people by trying to stick words in their mouth. that is arguing with yourself.

 

Is that a yes?

No.