I know that starting over Learning Math will be hard for most
of you , but it seems that the time that you were given to
Learn was used watching cartoons.

So , I thought I would help you guys here on sagg by introducing
you to a series of cartoon like math and science videos that might help to repair your knowledge deficit so that you can have a better understanding of things that are being discussed here on sagg and
elsewhere throughout your daily lives.

this first video is just to set the mood , its a song , and its not technical so you guys might be able to understand what the songs meaning is.

first relax and try to stop thinking about all the difficult
times you've had in the past when trying to do things like count
the change when you buy something , or trying to decipher what
those little pointy things on your watch represent , or how to set
your alarm clock.

I will try and make this interesting enough so that those of you
who have a learning disability will remain focused on the subject matter.



we dont want to go too fast because you need to allow time
for the information to soak into your brain cells that keeps
your knowledge stored for you.

lets call them your k-cells ( k for knowledge )

for now just replay the video until you have a good understanding
of the message that was in the video.

once you have absorbed the information that was presented in
the video you will understand how important it is to focus
on what it is that you are trying to teach your brain to understand , I know that some of you will have a very difficult
time so I will design this Learning course
( yes course is spelled that way )
to be presented at a very slow pace taking into consideration
your deficiencies.

Gentle Readers: Here again Paul tries to blame others for his insufficient grasp of basic mathematics. Some of the math he has used in his posts is at best wrong. Any body who has had high school level math can probably poke holes in his arguments.

If anybody wants to learn more math there are many elementary level math books available. If you don't want to use a book I can suggest Khan Academy. All the lessons are free. If you just want to review the rules of math and how they work you don't even have to register. If you want the full works you can register and get exams, discussions and what have you. They also have lessons in physics which will help you understand just how wrong Paul is in his posts.

Bill Gill

Vis fred’s ‘n earwig.

Wodger mean?

Like, earwig, Oh again!

Yer muppit!

This is the kind of sustained offensive content that drives one away from a forum. Freedom of speech is one thing, anarchy is another.

I don't see it as anarchy , I see it as the truth.

let me show you one example.



how would you summarize the above paragraph?

1) a force does not cause a object to change.

2) a force does cause a object to change.

3) it doesnt matter because science doesnt matter

Obviously the correct one, but the change may be at a molecular or atomic level.

We would now have to define movement with some precision.

I agree.

if the object is elastic , or it can deform under stress
or its atomic structure allows the intertwining of particles / penetration.

we should exclude anything except objects that are inelastic
and are not penetrable.



if two solids that are inelastic and do not deform at the molucular level are used as a standard then
we should be able to determine the movement / motion / velocity as in the below
example.





in the above the black mass has velocity.
the blue mass is accelerated by the force which
is the product of the mass * velocity of the black mass.

the resultant velocity of the two masses can easily
be calculated if we know the initial velocity of the
black mass and the ( mass ) of both masses.

So far, so good.

Now let's assume that the black mass is unable to move the blue mass, but the force continues to be applied to the black mass.

I'm assuming that a force is being applied to the black mass, not to accelerate it, but to overcome friction etc.

the problem with that is that in order for a net force to be present there must be a change in the blue mass.

if the tension placed on the blue mass by the black mass does not cause the black mass to change or accelerate then there never is a net force.

we are using inelastic / non deforming / non penetrable objects.

so if the total tension placed against the blue mass cannot overcome the total resistance of the blue mass to movement or deformation then there is no net force present.

TENSION
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tension_(physics)







http://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/mechanics/v/introduction-to-tension

Gentle readers, Please note that Paul is taking things out of context again. He is saying that no net force equals no force. This of course is completely at odds with the meaning of net force. Having a zero net force just means that all the forces operating on a mass provide a net sum of zero. This is clearly indicated in the quote he provides.

Bill Gill

Gently noted, and gently not invested or disturbed.

Surely the force placed on the blue block by the black is compressional, rather than tensional.

gee , your right , tension is exactly opposite of compression
and the correct word to use would be compression.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compression_(physical)





tension is a pull where compression is a push.
neither are forces unless they cause an object to accelerate.
because Force requires acceleration , F=ma

the opposite of tension still results in zero net force.

I'm not sure how I missed that!
maybe I just couldnt find a convincing article on compression
that is physics related and also involves inelastic objects.

its a good thing though because the little bit on compression
wouldnt be very convincing.

this way we already knew the definition of tension
and tension is the opposite of compression.

think of a person standing on the earth.
he is not being flung out into space at a 90 degree angle
to the axis of rotation , because the force of gravity is causing him to undergo angular acceleration.

he is not moving closer towards the center of rotation
but he is being accelerated towards the center of rotation
by the force of gravity.

and that is why he is following a circular path.

and that is why his feet stay on the ground.

It's not anarchy redewenur it's sustained stupidity and bleating from a religious fruitcakes who because of the lack of moderation on the forum can get away with it.

There are a number of good physics forums I could recommend like www.physicsforums.com which have active moderation of the religious nutters and their poor little gods they feel are buttwhipped by science.

Poor Paul is just one of the many religious nutters who is so insecure in his god ... just give him a big hug and comfort him.

Bill S give it up there is just stuff that doesn't become a force till something moves like there is stuff that doesn't become garbage until it comes out in Paul's posts ... pretty easy to understand.

Similarly I have proved Paul's GOD doesn't exist because his GOD can't move ... QED.

Paul typed:
"tension is a pull where compression is a push.
neither are forces unless they cause an object to accelerate.
because Force requires acceleration , F=ma"


Please try to comprehend:
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/k-12/airplane/newton1g.html

Sir Isaac Newton first presented his three laws of motion in the "Principia Mathematica Philosophiae Naturalis" in 1686. His first law states that every object will remain at rest or in uniform motion in a straight line unless compelled to change its state by the action of an external force. This is normally taken as the definition of inertia. The key point here is that if there is no net force resulting from unbalanced forces acting on an object (if all the external forces cancel each other out), then the object will maintain a constant velocity. If that velocity is zero, then the object remains at rest. And if an additional external force is applied, the velocity will change because of the force. The amount of the change in velocity is determined by Newton's second law of motion.

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/k-12/airplane/newton2c.html

This is F=m*a.

The error you guys are making is he isn't trying to comprehend anything he is trying to defend his religion because he feels science has buttwhipped his GOD.

Thus he simply trys to troll with endless stupidity and word games no logic or comprehension needed.

Don't feed the troll.

I do comprehend.
clearly.

you need to back away from the earth and see things he way they
are.

physics is not earth bound.

things only seem to work the way you see them work on earth
because you are accelerating with the earth.

You see gentle readers, Paul still keeps claiming he knows it all even though he has repeatedly demonstrated his inability to understand. He makes inaccurate statements, then when his error is pointed out he refuses to follow through on the comments and see where he is wrong.

Bill Gill

you know what , I think you guys are right.

you are all so clever and educated , if I ever needed any advice
or knew someone who did , I would recommend that they come here
to sagg for advice.

just think of the possibilities and the things you guys can
accomplish dictating to physics how physics works , making things react to things the way you want them to.

marvelous!! awesome !!

you guys are all such brilliant scientist type posers.

you dont even need to think.
just ask the other posers they have the correct answers that you
want.

posers