I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge

  • 10714 Replies
  • 462067 Views
*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #30 on: January 10, 2015, 06:36:52 AM »
Please do no start missing the point or pissing in the wind using latin. You have already proven several times you are a nobody.

I'm pleased to note that I'm still getting under Bjφrkman's skin LOL.  One has to ask why he repeatedly replies to every comment from a "nobody"?  Desperate for friends maybe?  Angered by exposure as a fraudster—again?  Fearful the "nobody" has made a fool of him?

    ;D

?

guv

  • 1132
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #31 on: January 10, 2015, 06:43:56 AM »
Here you go hewee prove how good you are.

In the following, u, v, w represent small displacements in the x, y, z directions (or as stated); σ, є represent direct stress and strain, and τ, γ shear stress and strain; E, G, ν are Young’s modulus, shear modulus and Poisson’s ratio; l, m, n are direction cosines and ψ a stress function; ρ is mass density. M, T are moment and torque; I is second moment or product moment of area; ω is a rotation unless otherwise stated.

http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-010-9314-9_5

Tell me all about that stuff. It can't be hard I am just a dumb hippy.

?

guv

  • 1132
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #32 on: January 10, 2015, 06:50:41 AM »
Come on Mr boat mechanic try this. It should be easy for a marine engineer.


Gravitational Slingshot
 
Interplanetary space probes often make use of the "gravitational slingshot" effect to propel them to high velocities. For example, Voyager 2 performed a close flyby of Saturn on the 27th of August in 1981, which had the effect of slinging it toward its flyby of Uranus on the 30th of January in 1986. Since gravity is a conservative force, it may seem strange that an object can achieve a net gain in speed due to a close encounter with a large gravitating mass. We might imagine that the speed it gains while approaching the planet would be lost when receding from the planet. However, this is not the case, as we can see from simple consideration of the kinetic energy and momentum, which shows how a planet can transfer kinetic energy to the spacecraft.
 
An extreme form of the maneuver would be to approach a planet head-on at a speed v while the planet is moving directly toward us at a speed U (both speeds defined relative to the "fixed" Solar frame). If we aim just right we can loop around behind the planet in an extremely eccentric hyperbolic orbit, making a virtual 180-degree turn, as illustrated below.
 

 
The net effect is almost as if we "bounced" off the front of the planet. From the planet's perspective we approached at the speed U+v, and therefore we will also recede at the speed U+v relative to the planet, but the planet is still moving at (virtually) the speed U, so we will be moving at speed 2U+v. This is just like a very small billiard ball bouncing off a very large one.
 
To be a little more precise, conservation of kinetic energy and momentum before and after the interaction requires
 

 
where subscripts 1 and 2 denote before and after, respectively. We eliminate U2 and solve for v2 to give the result
 

 
Since m/M is virtually zero (the probe has negligible mass compared with the planet), this reduces to our previous estimate of v2 = v1 + 2U1.
 
Of course, most planetary fly-bys are not simple head-on reversals, but the same principles apply for any angle of interaction. Let's take the planet's direction of motion as the x axis, and the perpendicular direction (in the orbital plane) as the y axis. The probe is initially moving with a speed v relative to the solar reference frame, in a direction approaching the oncoming planet at an angle theta. Two views of this are shown below, one with respect to the planet's rest frame, and the other with respect to the solar reference frame.
 

 
By drawing a simple parallogram of speeds for the probe and planet intersecting at an arbitrary angle q, and assuming we arrange for a hyperbolic orbit symmetrical about the x axis (with respect to the planet's rest frame), the probe's initial velocity vector with respect to the Sun's rest frame is
 

 
and its final velocity vector is
 

 
Thus its initial magnitude is v1, and its final magnitude is
 

 
For example, suppose the initial speeds of the probe and the planet happen to be exactly the same (i.e., v1 = U). In this case the above relation reduces to
 

 
which confirms that when q = 0 we have v2 = 3v1, which is our head-on reversal case. On the other hand, when q = p we have v2 = v1, which stands to reason, because in this case the probe and planet are going in the same direction at the same speed. For a more realistic case, we can have the probe approach nearly perpendicular to the planet's path (i.e., q = p/2) and swing just behind it. In that case the probe gets deflected in the direction of the planet's travel, at an angle given by the above formulas, and it's final speed is the square root of 5 (i.e., about 2.23) times its original speed.
 
If the planets were point particles, then according to classical physics it would be theoretically possible (in some rather contrived solar systems) for an object to acquire infinite speed in finite time by looping repeatedly around a set of planets. Of course, in practice the external gravitational field of a planet would not be strong enough to "grab" the spaceship once it was traveling above a certain speed. The limit is how fast you can loop around a planet without dipping into its atmosphere too deeply (let alone crashing into it). Some NASA missions have repeatedly skimmed the upper atmospheres of Venus and the Earth in their maneuvers (cross- pollinating the environments?).
 
Conceivably, if we (or someone else) ever found a star system consisting of multiple black holes orbiting each other, it might be possible to apply this scheme to achieve relativistic speeds, by looping around from one to the other. In this situation the achievable speed limit would depend on how close a spaceship could pass without being destroyed by tidal forces. Still, if the black holes were large enough, the tidal forces even at the event horizon would be tolerable, although it probably wouldn't be possible to have a controllable hyperbolic orbit pass closer than, say 3m. Also, stopping the vehicle at the destination would be difficult.
 
Return to MathPages Main Menu
 

have a go at that hewee

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #33 on: January 10, 2015, 08:20:15 AM »
The sheer extent of the attacks on Heiwa prove one thing to me. No ordinary person/s would go to so much trouble to attack him whilst attempting to ridicule a well set out web page that he has put up, with a lot of clear thought.
This doesn't mean I agree with it all but that's not the point. The point is, only clearly paid shills would take this amount of time to continuously attack him to the point of making topics designed to wear him down to stop him posting his thoughts.

I trust nobody as a rule, including Heiwa - sorry Heiwa, it's nothing personal - but having said this - I can clearly see who is 100% untrustworthy and are either literally being paid or have a vested interest in stopping their fantasies being dissolved.

Heiwa; if you have any sense, you will simply post up your thoughts and clearly understand that most of those who are opposing you, are only doing so because they fear you, nothing more.
The bully only feels confident among bullies. The lead bully loves control over the weaker bullies who follow, as each give the other a sense of control.
In terms of forums, mass ridicule can have the desired effect against one person if that person shows any sign of weakness against the onslaught.

Geoffrey is the lead bully. The good thing against him is, there are many people who think like him, that dislike him for being a bully.
He can't be bullied back because he runs crying to the mods, as he has done on numerous occasions when I've took him on. I've had to ignore him to save the mods the pain of having to deal with his constant complaints, or this is how it's made to appear. Who knows what is going on.

Most of the others you can debate with. My advice to you is to smile at Geoffrey or bypass his posts and keep up the good work.
Don't think people on here aren't reading your thoughts. There will be many. All people like Geoffrey are doing is trying to poison the free thinking persons minds and those who have the potential to see through the lies of what people like Geoffrey, spew.

I actually am being paid, but by Heiwa.  I have won his challenge as detailed on his site and now he has to hold up his end.
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

?

guv

  • 1132
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #34 on: January 10, 2015, 08:26:10 AM »
Good luck. better to put your bucks on a horse and most of them only run on drugs.

Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #35 on: January 10, 2015, 09:08:12 AM »
Come on Mr boat mechanic try this. It should be easy for a marine engineer.


Gravitational Slingshot
 
Interplanetary space probes often make use of the "gravitational slingshot" effect to propel them to high velocities. For example, Voyager 2 performed a close flyby of Saturn on the 27th of August in 1981, which had the effect of slinging it toward its flyby of Uranus on the 30th of January in 1986. Since gravity is a conservative force, it may seem strange that an object can achieve a net gain in speed due to a close encounter with a large gravitating mass. We might imagine that the speed it gains while approaching the planet would be lost when receding from the planet. However, this is not the case, as we can see from simple consideration of the kinetic energy and momentum, which shows how a planet can transfer kinetic energy to the spacecraft.
 
An extreme form of the maneuver would be to approach a planet head-on at a speed v while the planet is moving directly toward us at a speed U (both speeds defined relative to the "fixed" Solar frame). If we aim just right we can loop around behind the planet in an extremely eccentric hyperbolic orbit, making a virtual 180-degree turn, as illustrated below.
 

 
The net effect is almost as if we "bounced" off the front of the planet. From the planet's perspective we approached at the speed U+v, and therefore we will also recede at the speed U+v relative to the planet, but the planet is still moving at (virtually) the speed U, so we will be moving at speed 2U+v. This is just like a very small billiard ball bouncing off a very large one.
 
To be a little more precise, conservation of kinetic energy and momentum before and after the interaction requires
 

 
where subscripts 1 and 2 denote before and after, respectively. We eliminate U2 and solve for v2 to give the result
 

 
Since m/M is virtually zero (the probe has negligible mass compared with the planet), this reduces to our previous estimate of v2 = v1 + 2U1.
 
Of course, most planetary fly-bys are not simple head-on reversals, but the same principles apply for any angle of interaction. Let's take the planet's direction of motion as the x axis, and the perpendicular direction (in the orbital plane) as the y axis. The probe is initially moving with a speed v relative to the solar reference frame, in a direction approaching the oncoming planet at an angle theta. Two views of this are shown below, one with respect to the planet's rest frame, and the other with respect to the solar reference frame.
 

 
By drawing a simple parallogram of speeds for the probe and planet intersecting at an arbitrary angle q, and assuming we arrange for a hyperbolic orbit symmetrical about the x axis (with respect to the planet's rest frame), the probe's initial velocity vector with respect to the Sun's rest frame is
 

 
and its final velocity vector is
 

 
Thus its initial magnitude is v1, and its final magnitude is
 

 
For example, suppose the initial speeds of the probe and the planet happen to be exactly the same (i.e., v1 = U). In this case the above relation reduces to
 

 
which confirms that when q = 0 we have v2 = 3v1, which is our head-on reversal case. On the other hand, when q = p we have v2 = v1, which stands to reason, because in this case the probe and planet are going in the same direction at the same speed. For a more realistic case, we can have the probe approach nearly perpendicular to the planet's path (i.e., q = p/2) and swing just behind it. In that case the probe gets deflected in the direction of the planet's travel, at an angle given by the above formulas, and it's final speed is the square root of 5 (i.e., about 2.23) times its original speed.
 
If the planets were point particles, then according to classical physics it would be theoretically possible (in some rather contrived solar systems) for an object to acquire infinite speed in finite time by looping repeatedly around a set of planets. Of course, in practice the external gravitational field of a planet would not be strong enough to "grab" the spaceship once it was traveling above a certain speed. The limit is how fast you can loop around a planet without dipping into its atmosphere too deeply (let alone crashing into it). Some NASA missions have repeatedly skimmed the upper atmospheres of Venus and the Earth in their maneuvers (cross- pollinating the environments?).
 
Conceivably, if we (or someone else) ever found a star system consisting of multiple black holes orbiting each other, it might be possible to apply this scheme to achieve relativistic speeds, by looping around from one to the other. In this situation the achievable speed limit would depend on how close a spaceship could pass without being destroyed by tidal forces. Still, if the black holes were large enough, the tidal forces even at the event horizon would be tolerable, although it probably wouldn't be possible to have a controllable hyperbolic orbit pass closer than, say 3m. Also, stopping the vehicle at the destination would be difficult.
 
Return to MathPages Main Menu
 

have a go at that hewee
absurd garbage. The shit you scumbags dribble out to fleece hardworking people & their tax dollars is incredible. Geoff post the temperature variants in the atmosphere on anther thread. Did you not see the temperature clime in the stratosphere ,going from bellow -0 temps. How gullible do you think people are to believe this prob nonsense . The majority  of people know it's a total crock of fabricated shit & just get on with life because it's easier just to ignore it ,then copping the hostility that comes with confronting the lying scamming corporate scum. Sling shot lol what a joke.
When it comes to Jane's standards .I'm lower then an old stove she has in her garage.
Shannon Noll and Natalie Bassingthwaighte - Don't…:

?

BJ1234

  • 1931
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #36 on: January 10, 2015, 11:38:34 AM »
So space travel is fake because temps can't go below 0?  Should tell that to my thermometer a few days ago when the temp reached a high of -10 F.

?

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 22450
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #37 on: January 10, 2015, 12:17:46 PM »
So space travel is fake because temps can't go below 0?  Should tell that to my thermometer a few days ago when the temp reached a high of -10 F.
Temperature reading requires molecules. No molecules, no temperature reading.

?

BJ1234

  • 1931
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #38 on: January 10, 2015, 03:36:33 PM »
So space travel is fake because temps can't go below 0?  Should tell that to my thermometer a few days ago when the temp reached a high of -10 F.
Temperature reading requires molecules. No molecules, no temperature reading.
So there are no molecules in the stratosphere now?

Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #39 on: January 10, 2015, 07:54:01 PM »
So space travel is fake because temps can't go below 0?  Should tell that to my thermometer a few days ago when the temp reached a high of -10 F.
use your brain . What accelerated velocity is the rocket carrying the prob supposed to be travelling at.Now check the temperature variation through the layers of atmosphere. You claim to know all about molecules. I'd say you clowns don't know jack shit about molecules. Or you wouldn't believe in such piffle being sold to you.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2015, 07:58:45 PM by charles bloomington »
When it comes to Jane's standards .I'm lower then an old stove she has in her garage.
Shannon Noll and Natalie Bassingthwaighte - Don't…:

?

BJ1234

  • 1931
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #40 on: January 10, 2015, 08:08:20 PM »
So space travel is fake because temps can't go below 0?  Should tell that to my thermometer a few days ago when the temp reached a high of -10 F.
use your brain . What accelerated velocity is the rocket carrying the prob supposed to be travelling at.Now check the temperature variation through the layers of atmosphere. You claim to know all about molecules. I'd say you clowns don't know jack shit about molecules. Or you wouldn't believe in such piffle being sold to you.
1) What is an accelerated velocity?
2) How did we get to molecules from talking about temperatures?
3) Never claimed that I know all about molecules.
4) Just because you don't understand how something works doesn't make it fake.

Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #41 on: January 10, 2015, 08:10:30 PM »
I bet you confirmed batciulars just can't wait for NASA to probe Uranus. 😄
« Last Edit: January 10, 2015, 08:13:15 PM by charles bloomington »
When it comes to Jane's standards .I'm lower then an old stove she has in her garage.
Shannon Noll and Natalie Bassingthwaighte - Don't…:

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #42 on: January 10, 2015, 08:21:36 PM »
I bet you confirmed batciulars just can't wait for NASA to probe Uranus. 😄

This is a perfect example of flat earther intelligence.
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

Heiwa

  • 7376
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #43 on: January 10, 2015, 09:23:05 PM »
The sheer extent of the attacks on Heiwa prove one thing to me. No ordinary person/s would go to so much trouble to attack him whilst attempting to ridicule a well set out web page that he has put up, with a lot of clear thought.
This doesn't mean I agree with it all but that's not the point. The point is, only clearly paid shills would take this amount of time to continuously attack him to the point of making topics designed to wear him down to stop him posting his thoughts.

I trust nobody as a rule, including Heiwa - sorry Heiwa, it's nothing personal - but having said this - I can clearly see who is 100% untrustworthy and are either literally being paid or have a vested interest in stopping their fantasies being dissolved.

Heiwa; if you have any sense, you will simply post up your thoughts and clearly understand that most of those who are opposing you, are only doing so because they fear you, nothing more.
The bully only feels confident among bullies. The lead bully loves control over the weaker bullies who follow, as each give the other a sense of control.
In terms of forums, mass ridicule can have the desired effect against one person if that person shows any sign of weakness against the onslaught.

Geoffrey is the lead bully. The good thing against him is, there are many people who think like him, that dislike him for being a bully.
He can't be bullied back because he runs crying to the mods, as he has done on numerous occasions when I've took him on. I've had to ignore him to save the mods the pain of having to deal with his constant complaints, or this is how it's made to appear. Who knows what is going on.

Most of the others you can debate with. My advice to you is to smile at Geoffrey or bypass his posts and keep up the good work.
Don't think people on here aren't reading your thoughts. There will be many. All people like Geoffrey are doing is trying to poison the free thinking persons minds and those who have the potential to see through the lies of what people like Geoffrey, spew.

Thanks! I am only here because somebody linked to my popular web page about human space travel on the FES forum some monthes back. Human space travel is evidently impossible for physical reasons as explained there. But human space travel is also big business by plenty mafia style people supported by media, so it cannot be discussed in a friendly manner. Therefore all these off topic personal attacks on me (by anonymous pseudonyms). Happens all the time. 

*

Lemmiwinks

  • 2107
  • President of the Non-Conformist Zetetic Council
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #44 on: January 10, 2015, 10:04:11 PM »
Anders, the guy you keep saying is using a Pseudonym is named Mikeman... his name is Mike... Good lord man.

Besides which, if you decide that a computer model can't win your challenge then Mike is right, you obviously want to have a fully working Saturn V delivered to you. Might as well preface your challenge with "I WILL MAKE THIS IMPOSSIBLE TO WIN!".
I have 13 [academic qualifications] actually. I'll leave it up to you to guess which, or simply call me a  liar. Either is fine.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #45 on: January 10, 2015, 10:16:11 PM »
Anders, the guy you keep saying is using a Pseudonym is named Mikeman... his name is Mike... Good lord man.

Besides which, if you decide that a computer model can't win your challenge then Mike is right, you obviously want to have a fully working Saturn V delivered to you. Might as well preface your challenge with "I WILL MAKE THIS IMPOSSIBLE TO WIN!".

My name is actually not Mike, that's just my screen name.  My real name is Parker, I don't remember how I came up with that username but you are certainly not the first person to call me Mike.
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

?

guv

  • 1132
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #46 on: January 10, 2015, 10:41:24 PM »
I bet you confirmed batciulars just can't wait for NASA to probe Uranus. 😄

You are making me look literate again Charlie. How can I hide as a dumb hippie if you keep this up?.

*

Lemmiwinks

  • 2107
  • President of the Non-Conformist Zetetic Council
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #47 on: January 10, 2015, 10:43:28 PM »
Anders, the guy you keep saying is using a Pseudonym is named Mikeman... his name is Mike... Good lord man.

Besides which, if you decide that a computer model can't win your challenge then Mike is right, you obviously want to have a fully working Saturn V delivered to you. Might as well preface your challenge with "I WILL MAKE THIS IMPOSSIBLE TO WIN!".

My name is actually not Mike, that's just my screen name.  My real name is Parker, I don't remember how I came up with that username but you are certainly not the first person to call me Mike.

Well dammit Mike, way to make me look like an ass. :P Also Anders my name is John. Howdy.
I have 13 [academic qualifications] actually. I'll leave it up to you to guess which, or simply call me a  liar. Either is fine.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

?

guv

  • 1132
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #48 on: January 10, 2015, 10:47:20 PM »
And my name is guv, can I call him a used car salesman now?

*

Heiwa

  • 7376
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #49 on: January 11, 2015, 01:42:25 AM »
Anders, the guy you keep saying is using a Pseudonym is named Mikeman... his name is Mike... Good lord man.

Besides which, if you decide that a computer model can't win your challenge then Mike is right, you obviously want to have a fully working Saturn V delivered to you. Might as well preface your challenge with "I WILL MAKE THIS IMPOSSIBLE TO WIN!".

I am in shipping. To execute a voyage I need a description of the ship, crew and fuel used, etc. Not a computer model. Same applies to my Challenges. My Challenges are difficult and probably impossible that's why I offer €1M to win them. My Challenges are just an invitation to see who is smarter and stronger than me ... everybody has failed so far. I am not surprised.

Re the human space travel Challenge it is easy. Every human space trip done so far starting with Yuri Gagarin 1961 and ending with clowns going to the International Fake/Space Station 2015 is a hoax. It is not possible for a human to leave planet Earth. Basic. Anyone believing you can fly to the Moon or Mars is an idiot! It is not their fault - media/schools say you can fly to the Moon but ... April fool!
Try my other Challenge! A weak top bit C of a structure shall crash the stronger bottom part A keeping C up. Many US experts of all kind say it is possible! Has only happened twice, but anyway. They say it to support terrorism. Imagine that! http://heiwaco.com/chall.htm .
 

Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #50 on: January 11, 2015, 02:10:37 AM »
Anders, the guy you keep saying is using a Pseudonym is named Mikeman... his name is Mike... Good lord man.

Besides which, if you decide that a computer model can't win your challenge then Mike is right, you obviously want to have a fully working Saturn V delivered to you. Might as well preface your challenge with "I WILL MAKE THIS IMPOSSIBLE TO WIN!".

I am in shipping. To execute a voyage I need a description of the ship, crew and fuel used, etc. Not a computer model. Same applies to my Challenges. My Challenges are difficult and probably impossible that's why I offer €1M to win them. My Challenges are just an invitation to see who is smarter and stronger than me ... everybody has failed so far. I am not surprised.

Re the human space travel Challenge it is easy. Every human space trip done so far starting with Yuri Gagarin 1961 and ending with clowns going to the International Fake/Space Station 2015 is a hoax. It is not possible for a human to leave planet Earth. Basic. Anyone believing you can fly to the Moon or Mars is an idiot! It is not their fault - media/schools say you can fly to the Moon but ... April fool!
Try my other Challenge! A weak top bit C of a structure shall crash the stronger bottom part A keeping C up. Many US experts of all kind say it is possible! Has only happened twice, but anyway. They say it to support terrorism. Imagine that! http://heiwaco.com/chall.htm .
 
Why has neither claim been peer reviewed?

Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #51 on: January 11, 2015, 02:33:56 AM »
I am in shipping.
You are not.  You are in internet jabbering.  All day long: jibber jabber on the internet.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: brotherhood of the dome
Should I examine the all shits?

*

Heiwa

  • 7376
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #52 on: January 11, 2015, 08:25:10 AM »
Anders, the guy you keep saying is using a Pseudonym is named Mikeman... his name is Mike... Good lord man.

Besides which, if you decide that a computer model can't win your challenge then Mike is right, you obviously want to have a fully working Saturn V delivered to you. Might as well preface your challenge with "I WILL MAKE THIS IMPOSSIBLE TO WIN!".

I am in shipping. To execute a voyage I need a description of the ship, crew and fuel used, etc. Not a computer model. Same applies to my Challenges. My Challenges are difficult and probably impossible that's why I offer €1M to win them. My Challenges are just an invitation to see who is smarter and stronger than me ... everybody has failed so far. I am not surprised.

Re the human space travel Challenge it is easy. Every human space trip done so far starting with Yuri Gagarin 1961 and ending with clowns going to the International Fake/Space Station 2015 is a hoax. It is not possible for a human to leave planet Earth. Basic. Anyone believing you can fly to the Moon or Mars is an idiot! It is not their fault - media/schools say you can fly to the Moon but ... April fool!
Try my other Challenge! A weak top bit C of a structure shall crash the stronger bottom part A keeping C up. Many US experts of all kind say it is possible! Has only happened twice, but anyway. They say it to support terrorism. Imagine that! http://heiwaco.com/chall.htm .
 
Why has neither claim been peer reviewed?

13 September 2001 a peer reviewed scientific paper was published showing that it is perfectly normal that a weak top part C of any structure will crush the structure part A below keping the top part C in place to start with. C about 1/10A. I describe the nonsense in http://heiwaco.com/emi2013.htm .
The famous scientist showed that weak top C just crushed bottom A into rubble B at no time at all by gravity alone. Bottom part A didn't offer any resistance at all. It went POUFF, POUFF like:

or:

My Challenge #1 is to find and describe any structure going POUFF, POUFF.

Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #53 on: January 11, 2015, 08:44:33 AM »
Who was the famous scientist?

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #54 on: January 11, 2015, 09:22:45 AM »

I am in shipping.
 

Well... true I guess.  But being a boat mechanic doesn't necessarily make you more intelligent or more intuitive, or better educated than several of the PhDs that post on these forums.  Your id seems to be adversely affected by your ego every time you open your mouth here LOL.

Or have you really not noticed everybody on this forum laughing at your every claim?    ::)

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #55 on: January 11, 2015, 09:48:41 AM »
Anders, the guy you keep saying is using a Pseudonym is named Mikeman... his name is Mike... Good lord man.

Besides which, if you decide that a computer model can't win your challenge then Mike is right, you obviously want to have a fully working Saturn V delivered to you. Might as well preface your challenge with "I WILL MAKE THIS IMPOSSIBLE TO WIN!".

I am in shipping. To execute a voyage I need a description of the ship, crew and fuel used, etc. Not a computer model. Same applies to my Challenges. My Challenges are difficult and probably impossible that's why I offer €1M to win them. My Challenges are just an invitation to see who is smarter and stronger than me ... everybody has failed so far. I am not surprised.

Re the human space travel Challenge it is easy. Every human space trip done so far starting with Yuri Gagarin 1961 and ending with clowns going to the International Fake/Space Station 2015 is a hoax. It is not possible for a human to leave planet Earth. Basic. Anyone believing you can fly to the Moon or Mars is an idiot! It is not their fault - media/schools say you can fly to the Moon but ... April fool!
Try my other Challenge! A weak top bit C of a structure shall crash the stronger bottom part A keeping C up. Many US experts of all kind say it is possible! Has only happened twice, but anyway. They say it to support terrorism. Imagine that! http://heiwaco.com/chall.htm .
 

So now computer simulations are not valid?  The reason that they don't work as well on boats is because structural stuff is hard to simulate, but I don't think that the structural integrity of the Saturn V is even in question here other then reentry, the question is mostly about if it can make it with it's fuel, which is something that a simulation is ideal for.  Reentry is hard to simulate, which is why I used explenations and diagrams to explain it.  As for the various systems like engine gimbal, power cells, life support, ect... those are not really large engineering issues that could prevent Moon travel, so why do you need them described to you?

By the way, my offer is still up to varify the acuracy of the program.
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

Lemmiwinks

  • 2107
  • President of the Non-Conformist Zetetic Council
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #56 on: January 11, 2015, 11:21:14 AM »
Anders, the guy you keep saying is using a Pseudonym is named Mikeman... his name is Mike... Good lord man.

Besides which, if you decide that a computer model can't win your challenge then Mike is right, you obviously want to have a fully working Saturn V delivered to you. Might as well preface your challenge with "I WILL MAKE THIS IMPOSSIBLE TO WIN!".

I am in shipping. To execute a voyage I need a description of the ship, crew and fuel used, etc. Not a computer model. Same applies to my Challenges. My Challenges are difficult and probably impossible that's why I offer €1M to win them. My Challenges are just an invitation to see who is smarter and stronger than me ... everybody has failed so far. I am not surprised.

Re the human space travel Challenge it is easy. Every human space trip done so far starting with Yuri Gagarin 1961 and ending with clowns going to the International Fake/Space Station 2015 is a hoax. It is not possible for a human to leave planet Earth. Basic. Anyone believing you can fly to the Moon or Mars is an idiot! It is not their fault - media/schools say you can fly to the Moon but ... April fool!
Try my other Challenge! A weak top bit C of a structure shall crash the stronger bottom part A keeping C up. Many US experts of all kind say it is possible! Has only happened twice, but anyway. They say it to support terrorism. Imagine that! http://heiwaco.com/chall.htm .
 
Why has neither claim been peer reviewed?

13 September 2001 a peer reviewed scientific paper was published showing that it is perfectly normal that a weak top part C of any structure will crush the structure part A below keping the top part C in place to start with. C about 1/10A. I describe the nonsense in http://heiwaco.com/emi2013.htm .
The famous scientist showed that weak top C just crushed bottom A into rubble B at no time at all by gravity alone. Bottom part A didn't offer any resistance at all. It went POUFF, POUFF like:

or:

My Challenge #1 is to find and describe any structure going POUFF, POUFF.

Until you make the damaged floors of the towers their own section with their own structural integrity properties your entire "paper" will always be hilariously wrong.
I have 13 [academic qualifications] actually. I'll leave it up to you to guess which, or simply call me a  liar. Either is fine.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #57 on: January 11, 2015, 11:26:05 AM »
Who did the peer review, contact details please.

*

Heiwa

  • 7376
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #58 on: January 11, 2015, 12:29:03 PM »
Who did the peer review, contact details please.
Many years ago I got a paper published in the hardcopy ASCE Journal of Engineering Mechanics, JEM, and then the editor organized the peer review. After publication of my paper the poor editor was fired and probably tortured by CIA/DHS? I sent another paper to JEM but the new editor was afraid to handle it BUT it was later peer reviewed, etc., by EMI - http://heiwaco.com/emi2013.htm .

ASCE actually asked me to peer review papers coming in to them. You know, I am a recognized academician. But I don't like ASCE. They support terrorism! Not good.

It seems it is nothing wrong with my scientific analysises in my papers - but they are not policically correct. GWB and Condi Rice got upset!


*

kman

  • 990
  • Pastafarian
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #59 on: January 11, 2015, 12:37:42 PM »
Just like a rhetorical question isn't meant to be answered, it's just to make a point, it seems like this ridiculous challenge is just meant to make a point, and maybe to inflate Heiwa's ego. If mikeman gives Heiwa what he is asking for, Heiwa will probably just come up with some other requirements. Heiwa, you should meet Kent Hovind, he has a impossible little challenge too.
Heiwa, you implied that since no one has answered you challenge, everyone else it stupider than you. That is a serious case of hubris.
Quote from: Excelsior John
[USA TODAY and NPR] are probaley just a bunch of flippin wite sapremist websites you RASCIST
Quote from: modestman
i don't understand what you are saying=therfore you are liar