Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
The term troll has been misused far too often on this site IMHO.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Even if you WERE wrong,

---

Quote:

---

it is arrogant, elitist to patronize someone that way.

---

Quote:

---

If you really want to correct someone, you tell them WHY.

---

Quote:

---

Frem might not have time to explain everything, and he might say, do your homework.

---

Quote:

---

But if you've read the link and still have questions, he'll answer them.

---

Quote:

---

Out2 simply hurled accusations without substantiation,

---

Quote:

---

and I hate that too.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Did you not get frustrated when you were singled out for not towing the line? When you were dismissed outright because what you were saying did not parallel the predominate line of thinking at the time?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
It is human nature to gloss over troubles from our past, a coping mechanism I guess. How is one to learn from the past if one does not remember it?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kirkules:
While it is true that from F=mA(force=mass*acceleration)you can see in the form A=F/m that acceleration is inversely proportional to mass, assuming a equal initial force the lighter puppy has greater initial acceleration. But at the same time the heavier puppy has a greater kinetic energy at a given velocity (T=1/2mv2). Because drag is equal on both puppies, The kinetic energy of the lighter puppy is quickly overcome by drag while the heavier one has more energy to offset drag. This should mean that after a short distance the heaver puppy will have greater velocity.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Ever throw a cat? I have

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Chris, it is fairly obvious Out2theBlack is a troll. Just ignore him/her. Tryingtogetyour goatisall.

I have to say, I've never seen you this ruffled up before. Don't let Out2 get to you.

--------------------------
Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable.
--Mark Twain

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kirkules:
While it is true that from F=mA(force=mass*acceleration)you can see in the form A=F/m that acceleration is inversely proportional to mass, assuming a equal initial force the lighter puppy has greater initial acceleration. But at the same time the heavier puppy has a greater kinetic energy at a given velocity (T=1/2mv2). Because drag is equal on both puppies, The kinetic energy of the lighter puppy is quickly overcome by drag while the heavier one has more energy to offset drag. This should mean that after a short distance the heaver puppy will have greater velocity.

---

Yeah right- by that way of thinking an acorn would fall faster than a leaf.

I knew that.

Chrisisall

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kirkules:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Ever throw a cat? I have

---

You should always swing a cat. http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/no-room-to-swing-a-cat.html You'll get more velocity and the equation of motion is simpler(velocity=angular speed*radius).

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:


Effue you elitist psuedo-scientist. You wanna discuss physics in techno-speak detail instead of paying attention to the real-world application, go ahead. You ever use the term 'centrifical' instead of 'centripetal' I guess I should be all over your ass too, regardless whether I know what you're talking about, right? And in film terms, don't you dare say 'zoom in' when it's a track.

This is exactly why I visit RWED less and less- the self-important ego-driven semantics that take the place of idea exchange.

I asked you to correct me, but you wanted to stroke your vocabulary instead- you're worse than McKay on Stargate Atlantis, at least he'd explain himself while enjoying his smugness.

Plus, you put inappropriate spaces before commas, and capitalize when there's no need.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Just.. cause I really wanna know.

Are you like, not meanin to be offensive here, or are ya actually workin at it ?

Appease my curiosity, wouldja.

-F

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by out2theblack:

Do you really ?

Then do some wiki-google and look up things like :

'momentum' , 'laws of motion' , 'acceleration' , and 'centripetal force'...

---

So I should look up some words to understand the application of physical laws? Okay, stop being an idiot, ..

Feel free to sound even more like an ass, though...

The impatient Chrisisall

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
.. I'd hear time & again that I was wrong, but it was followed by no corrective advice leading me to believe that when folks do this, they are just hammering on someone to make some part of THEM feel better, + residual issues surrounding it for me.

---

Yeah, that's bullshit. Even if you WERE wrong, it is arrogant, elitist to patronize someone that way. If you really want to correct someone, you tell them WHY.

Frem might not have time to explain everything, and he might say, do your homework. But if you've read the link and still have questions, he'll answer them. Out2 simply hurled accusations without substantiation, and I hate that too.

--------------------------
It is easier to stay out than get out.
--Mark Twain

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kirkules:
While it is true that from F=mA(force=mass*acceleration)you can see in the form A=F/m that acceleration is inversely proportional to mass, assuming a equal initial force the lighter puppy has greater initial acceleration. But at the same time the heavier puppy has a greater kinetic energy at a given velocity (T=1/2mv2). Because drag is equal on both puppies, The kinetic energy of the lighter puppy is quickly overcome by drag while the heavier one has more energy to offset drag. This should mean that after a short distance the heaver puppy will have greater velocity.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
I just take issue with labelling *anyone* a troll, is all.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kirkules:

Thanks Kirkules. If Out2 weren't such an ass, he could have explained it to Chris this way to make his point, instead of the old "You flunked physics, didn't you?" I appreciate your taking the time to do this.

As I understand it, the point of contention is assumption of equal initial force. That is, Chris is saying a heavier puppy would have less initial velocity, and a lighter puppy more initial velocity. Of course, without knowing the difference between the initial velocities (if there is actually a difference), it is hard to say off the cuff whether the heavier puppy would still have the greater ending velocity.

--------------------------
The real purpose of the scientific method is to make sure Nature hasn't misled you into thinking you know something you don't actually know.
-- Robert M. Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

---

Let's review just a little...

First , C-I-A made a couple of posts in response to P-N's thread...

In which , he straddled a fence , in an effort to have his 'opinions' heard on both sides of an issue...He postulated a number of his assumptions in an effort to bolster his 'opinions'...

I haveen't a particular regard for 'opinions' in most cases in which mathematical 'proofs' are actually available , but that's just part of the scientific method , perhaps...But , neither had I suggested any math , yet , and as I recall , I still haven't suggested anyone take up the math...

I offered him some search terms so he'd be able to begin correcting *his own* misconceptions about the physics...But he insisted that I explain everything , in other words , act as his free tutor in physics...He rejected my suggestions to just look up the words...

In science , we'd have to come to some agreement about the definitions of the words that describe the things we're talking about...

Agreement on words like the search terms he was offered for his , and my , starting point...
Get on 'the same page' , one might say...But , he said that *I* just wanted a fight...

Who can offer *reason* to someone like that...

What followed , rather than his own sincere search of the relevant areas , was his efforts to out-type me , and the sarcasm about 'inertia' , followed immediately thereby with his ad hominem attacks...

If he'd gone and done some looking into the matter on his own , then he might've discovered that it wouldn't be as easy as he apparently believed , just because he'd stated that I should be able to explain it in only a few sentences . He would've then possibly realized that physics , which he possibly might've figured he must already know , would be perhaps somewhat more complicated...

But , hey , I'd thrown him a lifeline already...

Should we perhaps begin a list of all the things I've been called since this whole matter began ?

Seems a truism , yes , indeed , that some of the 'animals' ARE 'more equal' than others...

Rather than go away and begin his own 'education' , while things had not yet gotten too far out of hand , he continually clung to his assumptions that he must be the correct one , much like a drowning man grasping at straws , without apparently ever realizing that he had perhaps jumped into something over his head , with both feet going first...

At that point , I'm not going to jump in and try to 'save' him ', because , firstly , he didn't actually want to be saved , and secondly , he had begun taking me to task for his own faulty judgment...And thirdly , he continued to waste his 'breath' , so to speak , by continuing to hurl invective at me , flailing his arms against the keyboard , as it were...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
I just take issue with labelling *anyone* a troll, is all.

---

Well, ok. Maybe my definition of "troll" is too broad. In my view, a troll is anyone who has nothing of substance to say, and only says enough to bait emotional responses. Certainly at the beginning, Out2 met these criteria with making only comments like "You flunked physics, didn't you?"

However, now that he's posted more, I stand corrected. He is not a troll; he's just an ass and a bully.

--------------------------
Force and fraud are in war the two cardinal virtues.
--Thomas Hobbes

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by arclight:
What a waste. Puppies is good eatin'.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by out2theblack:
I haveen't a particular regard for 'opinions' in most cases in which mathematical 'proofs' are actually available ,

---

Quote:

---

I offered him some search terms so he'd be able to begin correcting *his own* misconceptions about the physics...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
I think the dog wasn't real after all!!! Ever throw a cat? I have (not to kill it- to get it to stop clawin' my leg), and if that puppy weighed what a smallish cat did, the toss at that speed is impossible due to it's weight- only a stuffed dog weighing very little could accelerate like that given the scruff-of-the-neck hold. Plus it spun in the air too fast to really weigh anything.


/B]

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by out2theblack:
Quantify , Please !

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by out2theblack:

Quantify , Please !

---

YEP ! Now You , at least , may be able to begin to make a point...You are even making many of MINE for me , which is actually somewhat gratifying , considering the length of this journey , so far...

That's just it. Chris can't quantify the variables... MY POINT EXACTLY !

...But then neither can you. , I KNEW THAT , too !

EXACTLY the point of my CHALLENGE to his ASSUMPTIONS...

So there is insufficient information to arrive at any conclusion, mathematically speaking... ALSO TRUE ! NEVERTHELESS , he made a CONCLUSION , actually many more than just the one...See , so far you and I don't disagree on any particular points , except for the name-calling that was launched early on...You went there , too , all over me , so please don't start preaching to me about it...

If you had made THAT argument to begin with, instead of the derisive remark about academic failures, we would not have any conflict now.
--------------------------
Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt.
-- Richard Feynman

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Tankobite:
First off, not a soldier, marine. There is a difference, both sides will correct you on that issue (though especially the Army guys in this case). Second, civilian kids do stupid shit too the difference is that this guy is going to get his shit handed to him by the Corps. I'm an army brat, but I'll give the marines that much; they know how to punish fuck-ups.

-----------------------------------------------------------
There's a widow in sleepy Chester
Who weeps for her only son;
There's a grave on the Pabeng River,
A grave that the Burmans shun;
And there's Subadar Prag Tewarri
Who tells how the work was done.

---

Quote:

---

Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy how's yer soul?"
But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll,
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.

We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints:
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:

I should probably just stay out of this thread, but I just can't believe the reverse obtuse twittiness being leveled at my friend Chrisisall over this. Chris...who has so eloquently called me several times a steaming pile of shit,

...and what does he get for it?...nothing but insults and b.s...most un-shiny!

---

Quote:

---

There's a widow in sleepy Chester
Who weeps for her only son;
There's a grave on the Pabeng River,
A grave that the Burmans shun;
And there's Subadar Prag Tewarri
Who tells how the work was done.

A Snider squibbed in the jungle,
Somebody laughed and fled,
And the men of the First Shikaris
Picked up their Subaltern dead,
With a big blue mark in his forehead
And the back blown out of his head.

Subadar Prag Tewarri,
Jemadar Hira Lal,
Took command of the party,
Twenty rifles in all,
Marched them down to the river
As the day was beginning to fall.

They buried the boy by the river,
A blanket over his face -
They wept for their dead Lieutenant,
The men of an alien race -
They made a samadh in his honor,
A mark for his resting-place.

For they swore by the Holy Water,
They swore by the salt they ate,
That the soul of Lieutenant Eshmitt Sahib
Should go to his God in state,
With fifty file of Burmans
To open him Heaven's gate.

The men of the First Shikaris
Marched till the break of day,
Till they came to the rebel village,
The village of Pabengmay -
A jingal covered the clearing,
Calthrops hampered the way.

Subadar Prag Tewarri,
Bidding them load with ball,
Halted a dozen rifles
Under the village wall;
Sent out a flanking-party
With Jemadar Hira Lal.

The men of the First Shikaris
Shouted and smote and slew,
Turning the grinning jingal
On to the howling crew.
The Jemadar's flanking-party
Butchered the folk who flew.

Long was the morn of slaughter,
Long was the list of slain,
Five score heads were taken,
Five score heads and twain;
And the men of the First Shikaris
Went back to their grave again,

Each man bearing a basket
Red as his palms that day,
Red as the blazing village -
The village of Pabengmay,
And the "drip-drip-drip" from the baskets
Reddened the grass by the way.

They made a pile of their trophies
High as a tall man's chin,
Head upon head distorted,
Set in a sightless grin,
Anger and pain and terror
Stamped on the smoke-scorched skin.

Subadar Prag Tewarri
Put the head of the Boh
On the top of the mound of triumph,
The head of his son below -
With the sword and the peacock-banner
That the world might behold and know.

Thus the samadh was perfect,
Thus was the lesson plain
Of the wrath of the First Shikaris -
The price of a white man slain;
And the men of the First Shikaris
Went back into camp again.

Then a silence came to the river,
A hush fell over the shore,
And Bohs that were brave departed,
And Sniders squibbed no more;
For the Burmans said
That a white man's head
Must be paid for with heads five-score.

There's a widow in sleepy Chester
Who weeps for her only son;
There's a grave on the Pabeng River,
A grave that the Burmans shun;
And there's Subadar Prag Tewarri
Who tells how the work was done.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Tankobite:
Agreed, but I am glad to see that the public has such a positive view of our service men; holding them to a higher standard then most. I'd prefer that to the idea that they were all fools and psychos. Reminds me of a Rudyard Kipling Poem, to be honest;

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
My FIRST impression is that if anyone has a working knowledge on how much effort it takes to throw a certian weight it would be Chrissisall. Knowledge of physics doesn't just come from books.

PRAXIS.
It's a real word.

---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by out2theblack:

Probably you'll get a job as a 'ninja-turtle' , considering you said your expertise is supposedly martial arts and pizza...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by out2theblack:
Quantify , Please !

---

That's just it. Chris can't quantify the variables. But then neither can you. So there is insufficient information to arrive at any conclusion, mathematically speaking.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:

Momentum: All things being equal, a heavier puppy has more momentum, and can travel faster than a lighter puppy. But all things are not equal, including initial force applied and initial velocity achieved--which was Chris' argument. So you have no idea what velocity was and what the momentum would have been.

Laws of motion: Neither inertia nor reciprocity of action is relevant. (Yes, we know the puppy will keep moving until something slows it down. And yes, we know something will slow it down. But tells us nothing about the weight of the puppy without knowing initial velocity.) That leaves acceleration, which we can address next.

Acceleration: I only watched the video once, so I could be wrong here. But it seemed to me the trajectory of the puppy was in a largely horizontal arc, with almost no straight vertical drop at the end. As soon as the puppy left the hand of the soldier, there was no longer any force being applied. The puppy would have simply lost velocity, not gained. I would disagree with Chris there was acceleration to begin with, except for the very small vertical drop at the end.

Centripetal force: The radius was the length of the soldiers arm. The puppy was hurled many times more that length. For most of the puppy's path, the difference made by mass in centripetal force would be insignificant. Again, what matters is the initifal velocity, which we do not know. So centripetal force, as I see it, is neither here nor there.

None of these terms are relevant in either supporting or refuting Chris' position. Ultimately, in my view, the video does not provide enough mathematical information to guess the weight of the puppy. It is not something that can be either asserted or refuted as a matter of fact or definition.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by out2theblack:

Probably you'll get a job as a 'ninja-turtle' , considering you said your expertise is supposedly martial arts and pizza...

---

LOL, Out2, that was SO gorram funny, I'm willin' to apologize for the 'idiot' remark.
I didn't see that one coming- I really had to wipe a tear out of my eye from the LOL.

Donatelloisall

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by out2theblack:


Good to see you come up for Air, Sir...

---

Quote:

---

I like many of your writings and concur with you about STTMP , and while I never met Bob Wise , I did get to meet Gene Roddenberry , an experience I could be compelled to relate sometime .

---

Quote:

---

Peace and Long Life...Brother .

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by mal4prez:
Incapable of resisting the physics discussion... I'm about to be a know-it-all. If you're one of those who doesn't like that, skip on by this post.

---

Quote:

---

Chris, the fact that the man held the puppylike object by the scruff means he held it to one side of its center of mass. This doesn't make it impossible to throw, it just gives it spin when he releases it, as a pool ball has spin if the cue hits it off center.

---

Quote:

---

Sadly, I don't recall seeing the plo slow down as much as I'd expect of a low density object. I wasn't watching for that, so I'm not sure.

---

Quote:

---

Back to the spin though. Air resistance also slows the rotation of a spinning object,and a low density object has less inertia and will be slowed more. Spin a styrofoam peanut. Spin the same shape/size rock. Styrofoam slows down quickly while the rock keeps spinning, right?

It seemed it me that a spinning stuffed animal that weighs very little should not keep spinning so quickly. That plo was spinning very quickly. This suggests enough rotational inertia, enough mass in the object, to overcome air drag.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kirkules:
Just a correction on the aerodynamic(Drag) side of the equation. The total drag on the puppy is the sum of the pressure drag and the skin friction drag. Neither of these is dependent on the mass or density of the puppy. For pressure drag what matters is the cross sectional area of the puppy, for friction drag it's the total surface area. Because the surface area and cross sectional area would be approximately the same for a stuffed animal or a real puppy, the drag coefficient can be assumed to be the same for both.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kirkules:
Just a correction on the aerodynamic(Drag) side of the equation. The total drag on the puppy is the sum of the pressure drag and the skin friction drag. Neither of these is dependent on the mass or density of the puppy. For pressure drag what matters is the cross sectional area of the puppy, for friction drag it's the total surface area. Because the surface area and cross sectional area would be approximately the same for a stuffed animal or a real puppy, the drag coefficient can be assumed to be the same for both.

---

But isn't the drag's effect changed by the weight of the object? I mean, doesn't a heavier object need a greater surface area to be affected by drag similarly to a lighter object?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kirkules:
Just a correction on the aerodynamic(Drag) side of the equation. The total drag on the puppy is the sum of the pressure drag and the skin friction drag. Neither of these is dependent on the mass or density of the puppy. For pressure drag what matters is the cross sectional area of the puppy, for friction drag it's the total surface area. Because the surface area and cross sectional area would be approximately the same for a stuffed animal or a real puppy, the drag coefficient can be assumed to be the same for both.

---

But isn't the drag's effect changed by the weight of the object? I mean, doesn't a heavier object need a greater surface area to be affected by drag similarly to a lighter object?


New student Chrisisall

---