Distances in the universe

  • 614 Replies
  • 135311 Views
?

Piesigma

  • 59
  • +0/-0
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #360 on: May 04, 2017, 09:15:51 AM »



It is easy to conceive, that if a man in one boat pulls at a rope attached to another boat, the two boats, if of the same size, will move towards each other at the same rate; but if the one be large and the other small, the rapidity with which each moves will be in proportion to its size, the large one moving with as much less velocity as its size is greater.

Haha. Let me help clarify for you Sandokhan. 

if of the same size, will move towards each other at the same rate; but if the one boat (not force) be large and the other boat (not force) is small, the rapidity with which each boat moves will be in proportion to its size, the large boat moving with as much less velocity as its size (mass) is greater.


Quote
A man in a boat pulling a rope attached to a ship, seems only to move the boat, but that he really moves the ship will be obvious when it is considered, that a thousand boats pulling in the same manner would make the ship meet them halfway.

This is fine and in no way supports you.  You may need to do more homework on the topic of inertia as it relates to using F=m*a.


Quote
IF THE ROPE WAS TRANSMITTING ONLY ONE FORCE, AS JACK AND SIGMA (NOT TO MENTION RABINOZ) WOULD HAVE US BELIEVE, THEN THE TWO BOATS WOULD MEET IN THE MIDDLE. ALWAYS.

To which this is a problem because?  Your reference does state; "if of the same size, will move towards each other at the same rate" to which you haven't yet objected to that I recall.

In reality there would/could be varied friction on the boat with the water so it would be possible for the two boats to meet at a point not in the middle.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2017, 09:22:51 AM by Piesigma »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7272
  • +7/-41
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #361 on: May 04, 2017, 09:35:26 AM »
I gave the two examples from the treatises on mechanics so that everyone can see that, in the real world, the two boats will not meet exactly in the middle.

Those two examples involve a different situation than the one explored here.

In those situations, the sizes of the two boats vary greatly, and pull with different forces.

In our example, the one analyzed here, the two boats are identical, while the applied forces vary in magnitude (that is, force A and force B are not of the same magnitude).


Can you understand the difference?

Your friend jack"blameitontherope"black has tried this venue, the accelerations, but it was to no avail.


In our example, we have two identical boats, which are being pulled with different forces.


Do you accept that all force acting on boat X comes from the rope? (for this part I don't care if it is because X is pulling on the rope or Y is, the only important part is that the entirety of the force acting on boat x is being applied to boat X by the rope)

His tag team partner, sigma, is trying to use same argument, as follows:

If there is tension in the rope due to people pulling on each end then Newton's Third Law requires that at that moment they are pulling with exactly the same force as in an action/reaction pair (forces are equal and opposite).


But a rope can transmit more than one force.

It is very easy to prove this.

IF THE ROPE WAS TRANSMITTING ONLY ONE FORCE, AS JACK AND SIGMA (NOT TO MENTION RABINOZ) WOULD HAVE US BELIEVE, THEN THE TWO BOATS WOULD MEET IN THE MIDDLE. ALWAYS.


Another way to put it:

If the rope was transmitting only one force, then A = B (another way of saying that the boats would meet exactly in the middle).

The converse IS ALSO TRUE: if A = B, then the rope will be transmitting only one force (or in the FE analysis case, the two mentioned forces; the correct FE analysis can handle the case where A = B easily).

If A = B, then the two boats will meet exactly in the middle.


Here is the proof.


The net force on boat x is -A.
The net force on boat y is -B.
The net force on the string is A+B.
As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.



The RE's own analysis, assumed to be the very best that they can come up with, reaches the following conclusion:

As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.


That is: |A|=|B|

If A = B, then the two boats will meet in the middle.


Now, sigma, let me remind you of your own quote where YOU AGREE WITH ME.

Remember this?


Quote
The two boats will meet at some point between them.

Agreed for the boat scenario.

You do agree that if the two identical boats pull with different forces, then THEY WILL MEET AT SOME POINT BETWEEN THEM, never exactly in the middle.


Since by the very hypothesis forces A and B are of a different magnitude, the boats will never meet exactly in the middle.

Thus TWO FORCES MUST BE TRANSMITTED THROUGH THE SAME ROPE.

If only one force was being transmitted, then the two boats would meet exactly in the middle.

But they do not.


The two men in the boats will be jackblack and disputeone.

Since jackblack needs to vent his fury at his miserable analysis having been thrashed thoroughly in this thread he will pull extremely hard: 200N (location: boat X).

disputeone is trolling along, he will pull with a force of 140N (location: boat Y).

Of course they will meet not in the middle, but somewhere along the line of the rope.


RE analysis

The net force on boat x is -200N.
The net force on boat y is -140N.
The net force on the string is 200N + 140N.
As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.

We quickly notice the stupendous contradiction which we reach in an instant of a second.


As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.

A = 200N

B = 140N

There is no way that 200N + 140N = 0.

There is no way that 140N = -200N.

It is as simple as this.


Let us remember that the foregoing RE analysis cannot be applied even in a hypothetical case where:

Force A = 100.000,000,000 N

Force B = 100.000,000,001 N

Even in this case B will not be equal to -A.



EQUATIONS DO NOT LIE.


As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.

A = 200N

B = 140N

There is no way that 200N + 140N = 0.

There is no way that 140N = -200N.

It is as simple as this.



FE analysis

The net force on boat X will be: -200N + 140N

The net force on boat Y will be: -140N + 200N

The net force on the string will be [200N - 140N] + [140N - 200N]


Since the string is not moving, the net force on the string is 0:

[200N - 140N] + [140N - 200N] = 60N - 60N = 0


All forces balance out perfectly.

But they include TWICE THE FORCES NEEDED in the Newtonian system.

No contradictions whatsoever.



As the two men pull SIMULTANEOUSLY, two forces will be exerted on boat X at once: -A and B.


EQUATIONS DO NOT LIE.


The RE equation leads to this contradiction:

As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.

A = 200N

B = 140N

There is no way that 200N + 140N = 0.

There is no way that 140N = -200N.

It is as simple as this.


On the other hand, the correct FE analysis leads to the solution:

The net force on boat X will be: -200N + 140N

The net force on boat Y will be: -140N + 200N

The net force on the string will be [200N - 140N] + [140N - 200N]


Since the string is not moving, the net force on the string is 0:

[200N - 140N] + [140N - 200N] = 60N - 60N = 0


All forces balance out perfectly.

But they include TWICE THE FORCES NEEDED in the Newtonian system.

No contradictions whatsoever.

*

Zaphod

  • 137
  • +0/-0
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #362 on: May 04, 2017, 10:34:27 AM »


In our example, the one analyzed here, the two boats are identical, while the applied forces vary in magnitude (that is, force A and force B are not of the same magnitude).




So just to be sure, do you think the forces experienced by the 2 boats are different?

If you do then you are fundamentally misunderstanding the idea of tension in the rope. I also believe you are misunderstanding the amount of tension in the rope which is why I keep asking you the same question. If 2 people pull on the rope with 100N each, what would a spring balance in the middle of the rope read?

Please, humour me, what do you think the gauge should read?

*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #363 on: May 04, 2017, 03:00:51 PM »
This is the ONLY situation to which the RE analysis applies: the only one that cannot happen in real life.
Close.
You are correct that this is the only situation where the correct analysis of the situation applies (that done by the REers here).
However that is the only one which CAN happen in real life.
If the forces are unbalanced it violates Newton's laws of motion so the situation is not as described.


The correct FE analysis applies to ALL OF THE SITUATIONS, whether A equals B, or if A does not equal B.
The incorrect (some would say retarded) "analysis" will apply to any situation and just go further away from it, completely contradicting itself and ending up changing the situation to one which can be real or just ignoring part of the force.

So, you have just answered your own very question:

Do you accept that all force acting on boat X comes from the rope? (for this part I don't care if it is because X is pulling on the rope or Y is, the only important part is that the entirety of the force acting on boat x is being applied to boat X by the rope)
Again, I already know the answer. I want you to explicitly answer it so you can't get away with bullshitting your way out of it by pretending you never said it.

So ANSWER THE QUESTION:
Do you accept that all force acting on boat X comes from the rope? (for this part I don't care if it is because X is pulling on the rope or Y is, the only important part is that the entirety of the force acting on boat x is being applied to boat X by the rope)

It is a very simple yes or no question.

Until you answer this question so we can move on to the next one further discussion of your insane refuted crap is rather pointless.
I have already pointed out what is wrong it many times, yet you just keep on repeating it.

IF THE ROPE WAS TRANSMITTING ONLY ONE FORCE, AS JACK AND SIGMA (NOT TO MENTION RABINOZ) WOULD HAVE US BELIEVE, THEN THE TWO BOATS WOULD MEET IN THE MIDDLE. ALWAYS.
No. They would only meet in the middle if they had the same resistance to motion.
i.e. in our situation where we are ignoring the water, if their inertia and thus mass was the same.

Here is the analysis of that.
Lets say boat X starts at x0, and boat y at -x0 (such that the middle is at x=0).
They initially have a velocity of 0, and the only acceleration they recieve is due to the force from the rope between them.

F=ma.
Thus a=F/m.
v=a*t+v0
x=(1/2)*a*t^2+v0*t+x0.

Now putting in some to simplify it a bit (using our analysis where |F|=|A|=|B| and A=-B:
x(X) (the position of boat x)=(-A/2mX)*t^2+x0.
x(Y)=(A/2mY)*t^2-x0.

We want to look at where they meet. We do this by equating the 2 equations to find t (or t^2), and then subbing it back in, this gives:
(-A/2mX)*t^2+x0=(A/2mY)*t^2-x0
2*x0=(A/2)*(1/mY+1/mX)*t^2.
2*x0=(A/2)*(mX+mY)/(mY*mY)*t^2.
2*x0*(2/A)*(mX*mY/(mX+mY))=t^2.
t^2=4*x0*mX*mY/((mX+mY)*A)

Now subbing that back in to x(X):
x=(-A/2mX)*t^2+x0.
=(-A/2mX)*4*x0*mX*mY/((mX+mY)*A)+x0.
=x0-2*x0*mY/(mX+mY)

If we tried putting it into x(Y):
x=(A/2mY)*t^2-x0.
=(A/2mY)*4*x0*mX*mY/((mX+mY)*A)-x0.
=2*x0*mX/(mX+mY)-x0.

So now we have the position that the meet as x0-2*x0*mY/(mX+mY)=2*x0*mX/(mX+mY)-x0.
Before you complaign that they are different:
x0-2*x0*mY/(mX+mY)=2*x0*mX/(mX+mY)-x0
2*x0=2*x0*mX/(mX+mY)+2*x0*mY/(mX+mY)
1=mX/((mX+mY)+mY/(mX+mY)
1=(mX+mY)/(mX+mY)
1=1.

So they are just different ways of saying the same thing.
The 2 numbers are equal.

Now lets try some different options.
Lets say mX=mY=m
x(X)=x0-2*x0*m/(m+m)
=x0-2*x0*m/(m*(1+1))
=x0-2*x0/2
=x0-x0
=0

(doing x(Y) will give you the same, x0-x0, or before that 2*x0/2-x0)

What if mX=m, but mY=1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 (insert lots more 0s)*m?
In this case mX+mY=~mY.
and mX/mY=~0. (mY/mX=~infinite).
That means:
x(X)=x0-2*x0*mY/(mX+mY)
=~x0-2*x0*mY/(mY)
=x0-2*x0
=-x0.

Using x(Y):
x(Y)=2*x0*mX/(mX+mY)-x0.
=~2*x0*mX/mY-x0.
=~0-x0.

So the boats meet at -x0, which was the position of Y.
Just like what you would expect.
What about if mX=m, and mY=2m?
Then for x(X) we have:
x(X)=x0-2*x0*mY/(mX+mY)
=x0-2*x0*2m/(m+2m)
=x0-4*x0/(1+2)
=x0-4*x0/3
=x0*(1-4/3)
=-x0/3.
Similarly, x(Y)=-x0/3
This means that boat Y has travelled 2/3 x0, while boat X travelled 4/3 x0.
Or, boat X, which was only half as heavy as boat Y, travelled twice as far.

In fact, you can do this for any ratio, where mX=m and mY=r*m:
x(X)=x0-2*x0*mY/(mX+mY)
=x0-2*x0*r*m/(m+r*m)
=x0-2*r*x0/(1+r)
=(1+r)*x0/(1+r)-2*r*x0/(1+r)
=((1+r)*x0-2*r*x0)/(1+r)
=(x0+r*x0-2*r*x0)/(1+r)
=(x0-r*x0)/(1+r)

x(Y)=2*x0*mX/(mX+mY)-x0.
=2*x0*m/(m+r*m)-x0.
=2*x0*/(1+r)-x0.
=2*x0/(1+r)-x0*(1+r)/(1+r)
=(2*x0-x0*(1+r))/(1+r).
=(2*x0-x0-x0*r)/(1+r).
=(x0-r*x0)/(1+r).

Confirming that the 2 are the same, just expressed in slightly different ways.

Note that if r=1, it gives you 0.
If r>1, x<0 and it meets closer to Y.
If r<1 x>0 and it meets closer to X

Also note the distance X travels:
X starts at x0 and thus travels:
tX=x0-(x0-2*r*x0/(1+r))
=2*r*x0(1+r)
Boat y travels:
tY=2*x0*/(1+r)-x0-(-x0).
=2*x0*/(1+r)

Thus tX=r*tY.

So no, don't lie, our analysis works fine with boats of different sizes and where they meet.
Doing it our way we get the 2 boats moving an extent proportional to their sizes.

Doing it your way, you end up with a net force which is equal but opposite, meaning both boats still meet in the middle.

The RE's own analysis, assumed to be the very best that they can come up with, reaches the following conclusion:
As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.
That is: |A|=|B|
You seem surprised that it comes up with Newton's third law and accurately analysis the situation. Why is that?

IF THE ROPE WAS TRANSMITTING ONLY ONE FORCE, AS JACK AND SIGMA (NOT TO MENTION RABINOZ) WOULD HAVE US BELIEVE, THEN THE TWO BOATS WOULD MEET IN THE MIDDLE. ALWAYS.
Only if they were the same size and no external forces were acting. And guess what? That matches reality.

You reach the same conclusion. Remember this:
On the other hand, the [in]correct FE analysis leads to the solution:
The net force on boat X will be: -200N + 140N

The net force on boat Y will be: -140N + 200N
Notice how the net force on boat X will be -60N, and the net force on boat Y will be 60 N?
That means you have an equal but opposite force acting on the boats. Thus if they are the same size, they will meet in the middle.


NOW ANSWER MY QUESTION (or tell us why you continually refuse. Is it because you have no idea, or is it because you know this line of logical questioning and reasoning will show you to be full of shit?):
Do you accept that all force acting on boat X comes from the rope? (for this part I don't care if it is because X is pulling on the rope or Y is, the only important part is that the entirety of the force acting on boat x is being applied to boat X by the rope)

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
  • +3/-2
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #364 on: May 04, 2017, 03:09:02 PM »
Can we change the topic subject? Maybe to 'Sandokhans BS theories and how they relate to boats and ropes'

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #365 on: May 04, 2017, 03:49:11 PM »
Considering you don't want to answer the question (either because you don't know the answer, because you know the answer will lead to you being shown to be completely wrong, or because your coding can't handle such a question), I will do so for you, making a list.

If you object, point out exactly which one you object to, what the :

1 - Do you accept that all force acting on boat X comes from the rope? (for this part I don't care if it is because X is pulling on the rope or Y is, the only important part is that the entirety of the force acting on boat x is being applied to boat X by the rope).

The answer should be yes. If it wasn't it raises the question of what else is applying a force to X. The only entities we are considering in this problem are the 2 boats (the people are included as part of the boat) and the rope.
The only way for boat Y to transfer force is via the rope.
So the answer must be yes.

So we will call this net force -F. (this is equal to -A=B in my analysis and =-A+B in your analysis).

2 - Do you accept Newton's third law, that for every action there is an equal but opposite reaction?
Again, the answer will be yes.
Your analysis has relied upon this extensively. Without it you wouldn't be able to get anywhere, as there would be no connection between the forces.

3 - Do you thus accept that there must exist an action/reaction force pair (or pairs) between boat X and the rope, such that the rope is applying a force of -F to the boat, and the boat is applying a force of F to the rope?
Again, the answer has to be yes. You accept that the rope is applying a net force of -F to the boat, and that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, and thus if the rope is applying a force of -F, the boat needs to apply a force of F.

4 - Do you realise that this so far has not produced any contradiction in my analysis, as boat X is pulling with a force of A, and F=A?
Again, the answer is yes. There is no contradiction to be found here, and you weren't complaining that this is a contradiction before.

5 - Do you realise that this produces a contradiction in your analysis as you have boat X pulling on the rope with a force of A, but as per the previous questions boat X needs to be pulling with a force of F=A-B, not A. So the only way for there to not be a contradiction is if B=0. (I will bring this possibility back up later, i.e. in a few questions time).
Again, the answer has to be yes. The only way to avoid a contradiction is if A=A-B, which requires B to be 0. But for the hypothetical (completely unreal situation) you described, B=140 N, not 0.
So again, the answer will be yes (with the caveat of a few questions time considering this possibility).

6 - Do you accept that that means your analysis is wrong?
Again, the answer has to be yes. As this has a contradiction, either the situation is wrong, or your analysis is wrong.
We know that you can pull boats together. So the situation is possible (at least with generic forces A and B). So the only option left is your analysis is wrong.

7 - Do you accept that the above (or an equivalent) applies for boat Y? (the equivalent is that the force the rope applies is now F, not -F, which =A=-B in my analysis and A-B in yours, and thus to avoid the contradiction you would need A=0).
Again, the answer has to be yes, as there is nothing special about either boat. The only difference is direction and allegedly force applied. It is entirely symmetrical.

8 - Do you thus accept that in order to avoid contradiction you need A=0 and B=0?
Again, the answer has to be yes, as that is what the prior reasoning has showed. In order to balance the action-reaction pair(s) on boat X and the rope, you need A=A-B (or -A=-(A-B) and thus B=0. In order to balance the pair(s) between boat Y and the rope you need B=B-A, so A=0.
Thus the only way to avoid contradiction would be if A=B=0.

9 - Do you thus realise that the only way to avoid contradiction with your analysis is if there is no force applied?
Again, the answer has to be yes, as you have A=B=0, so no force applied.

10 - Do you thus realise your analysis must be wrong as you can have 2 boats pulled together by some force?
Again, the answer has to be yes, especially as you have quoted mechanics text books that claim this as evidence. The only way to avoid it is by claiming you can't have 2 boats pulled together by a rope, which completely contradicts reality.

11 - Regardless of the above, do you notice that this contradicts your claim that A and B are of different magnitude, as 0 is the same magnitude as 0?
Again, the answer has to be yes, unless you wish to go completely insane by claiming |0|!=|0|.

12 - Setting aside those contradictions, do you accept that the net force acting on the rope comes from the force applies to the rope by boat X and boat Y?
Again, the answer has to be yes, as that is the only other entities and thus the only entities capable of acting on the rope.

13 - Do you accept that the net force on the rope (which is presumed to be massless or of an insignificant mass compared to the boats) must equal 0?
Again, the answer has to be yes. You have used that repeatedly in your analysis and have made no objection to it, and if it wasn't, it would require the rope itself to accelerate, with an infinite rate due to its 0 mass.

14 - Do you accept that that means if X applies a force of F, Y must apply a force of -F?
Again, the answer has to be yes. This is because X applies a force of F, Y applies a force of ?? and the sum is 0. That means F + ?? = 0
The only way to solve that is for ??=-F, such that you have F-F=0. This also works if you try to set F to be 0, as then ?? needs to equal 0, making it equal to -F.
So again, the answer is yes.

15 - Do you accept that that means Y is applying a force that is equal but opposite that of X?
Again, this must be true, as you have X applying a force of F and Y applying one of -F.
They are equal but opposite.

16 - Do you accept that this is an accurate depiction of the situation:
Boat X pulls the rope with force F
The rope pulls boat X with force -F.
The rope pulls boat Y with force F.
Boat Y pulls the rope with force -F.

The net force on boat X is -F.
The net force on boat Y is F.
The net force on the rope is F-F=0.
?
Again, the answer must be yes as that is what we have concluded from above.

17 - Do you accept that that contradicts your claim that the force applied by each can be different in magnitude?
Again, the only answer is yes as we have just concluded that they must be equal but opposite, i.e. equal in magnitude but opposite in sign.

18 - Do you accept that that means your situation of one boat pulling with a force of A and another pulling with a force of B, which is different in magnitude is impossible?
Again, the answer needs to be yes as that above reasoning has shown this.

19 - Do you accept that unlike your analysis which lead to it being impossible to bring 2 boats together with rope, this analysis just shows that the force applied by each boat must be equal in magnitude?
Again, the answer has to be yes, as that is what is shown by the above analysis.

20 - Do you accept that this means our analysis doesn't contradict observed reality, as there have been no recorded observations of 2 boats being pulled together when the forces were different?
Again, this has to be yes, as the main ways to measure force would be via a weight on a pulley, which if the weights were not equal one would rise and get jammed in the pulley and thus no longer be a measurement, or by using a spring scale/tension device, which would work equally in either direction and thus show the same force regardless of where on the rope it was (assuming the rope ends at the 2 boats).

21 - Do you accept that this means our analysis matches reality, while yours does not?
Again, the answer has to be yes. No one has ever recorded 2 boats being pulled together by unequal forces, but they have measured 2 boats being pulled together.

22 - Do you accept that this means our analysis is correct?
Again, the only answer is yes, as ours matches reality, is based upon logical reasoning and has no contradictions?

23 - Do you accept that this means there is no doubling of forces?
Again, the answer has to be yes as the net force on boat X is the force boat Y is pulling with and vice versa.

I know that there was a lot of questions. I was trying to keep them simple so if you have an objection you can clearly point out what it is.

If you have an objection with multiple questions, start with the first one that you have an objection with, we can deal with that and then move on.

?

Piesigma

  • 59
  • +0/-0
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #366 on: May 04, 2017, 04:08:34 PM »
Sandokhan you have said:


FE analysis

The net force on boat X will be: -200N + 140N

The net force on boat Y will be: -140N + 200N

The net force on the string will be [200N - 140N] + [140N - 200N]


Since the string is not moving, the net force on the string is 0:

[200N - 140N] + [140N - 200N] = 60N - 60N = 0


All forces balance out perfectly.

But they include TWICE THE FORCES NEEDED in the Newtonian system.

No contradictions whatsoever.

This means:
The net force on boat X will be: -60N
The net force on boat Y will be: 60N
The net force on the string will be: 60N-60N = 0

Net force means an imbalance in force and that this force will accelerate the body (put the boat in motion in this example) and this force has a magnitude of 60N and acting on each boat but opposite direction.  Speaking of contradictions, stop denying what you keep implying yourself, lol.

Would you mind explaining and showing with analysis to your readers how the two boats will not meet in the middle?

Here I will do your homework for you given how I understand your example:

Let’s continue the analysis to reveal your contradiction(s). 

Since the boats are the same size let’s give each boat a mass of 60Kg (including the man on each boat) and they start at 100 m apart with no initial velocity.

If there is a net force on boat X of -60N (-200N +140N):

a_x=F_net/m_boat = -60N/60Kg =- 1 m/s^2

There is also a net force of 60N (-140N+200N) on boat Y:

a_y=F_net/m_boat=60N/60Kg =+1 m/s^2

The distance each boat travels due to this net force after elapsed time t may be given by:

D(t)=D_0 +1/2*a*t^2

So let’s start Boat X at position 100 m:

D_0x=100m

Let’s start Boat Y at position 0 m:

D_0y= 0m

D_0x-D_0y=100m-0m = 100m (check)

We see that at t=10 seconds with Boat X under a constant net force of -60N has traveled:

D (10s)_x = D_0x+1/2 *a_x * t^2 = 100m +1/2* (-1 m/s^2)*10 ^2* s^2 = 100m-50m = +50m

Hmmn,  I wonder how far boat Y has travelled in the same amount of time (t=10 seconds) from its initial position under a constant net force of 60N?

D(10s) _y = D_0y + ½*a_y*t^2 = 0m +1/2* (1 m/s^2)* 10^2*s^2= 0m +50m = +50m

Looks like they meet right in the middle Sandokhan. 

You can play with different numbers if you don't like mine.
 
Are you going to now try to tell your readers that Boat X or Boat Y will only accelerate due to Force A (-200N) or Force B (140N)?


Remember when you said this:

Quote
Since by the very hypothesis forces A and B are of a different magnitude, the boats will never meet exactly in the middle.

Thank you for helping show your readers that you are wrong about the boats not meeting in the middle in your example. 

I don't care if you want to break up 60N into fractional components (the math works just fine if T= -A +B or B-A) but I don't have a valid reason or evidence why I should ever treat individually your "Force A" and "Force B" as able to solely accelerate Boat X or Boat Y differently in your example.  Your very own analysis contradicts that the two boats of the same size would undergo a different resultant acceleration than due to either -A+B or B-A which are of the same magnitude and opposite direction just as Newton's Third Law requires.

In a very strangely written way (which is okay) due to further clarification (new information presented) it now seems this is what you were conveying earlier here:

Quote
Boat X WILL NOT MOVE forward JUST because boat Y is pulling (force B); not at all.

Boat X will also thrust forward based on a second force, the man doing the pulling on the rope with force A.

Are you saying here that the resultant of Force A and Force B obey Newton's Third Law? 

If so, then many of us are just saying the same thing and expressing the resultant net force in different ways (T=-A+B or B-A, A=-A+B (reassigned variable), F=B-A(reassigned variable), A=-B (reassigned variable), etc.).  Still, each boat accelerates due to the same resultant magnitude of force and meets in the middle.


I should also note that it is possible for a rope to be split into 3 (or more/less) separate ends to pull from:
Ex.
1. If 3 people pulled evenly then each person would pull with a force of T/3 where T is the tension in the rope (T=T/3+T/3+T/3)
2. 3 people pull with different magnitudes of force, one person pulling with force T/2, and 2 people pulling with force T/4 (T= T/2+T/4+T/4)

In any case the tension in the rope is still 1*T.

Notice that this example looks awfully similar to what your are saying about more than one force acting on a rope but is crucially different regarding any bodies that would/could be accelerated by the resultant tension in the rope?

« Last Edit: May 04, 2017, 05:19:53 PM by Piesigma »

?

Twerp

  • Gutter Sniper
  • Flat Earth Almost Believer
  • 6540
  • +0/-0
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #367 on: May 04, 2017, 06:21:13 PM »
Can we change the topic subject? Maybe to 'Sandokhans BS theories and how they relate to boats and ropes'

If dutchy modifies the title of the OP the title of the thread will change. The title of all the posts made between the OP and now will stay the same unless the poster modifies it.
“Heaven is being governed by Devil nowadays..” - Wise

*

disputeone

  • 28101
  • +116/-116
  • Or should I?
Re: Sandokhans BS theories and how they relate to boats and ropes
« Reply #368 on: May 04, 2017, 06:36:29 PM »
Can we change the topic subject? Maybe to 'Sandokhans BS theories and how they relate to boats and ropes'

Request granted.
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7272
  • +7/-41
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #369 on: May 04, 2017, 09:08:43 PM »
jack, wake up!

Your equations AMOUNT TO NOTHING.


F=ma.
Thus a=F/m.


Exactly.

But you said that |A|=|B|.

THEREFORE, SINCE BOTH BOATS HAVE THE SAME MASS, BY HYPOTHESIS, YOU CANNOT VARY YOUR ACCELERATION AT ALL.

IN THE RE ANALYSIS THE TWO BOATS HAVE TO MEET IN THE MIDDLE.

There is no working around that.


x0-2*x0*mY/(mX+mY)=2*x0*mX/(mX+mY)-x0

The two masses are equal.

The forces applied are the SAME in your analysis.

The two boats will meet in the middle.


Now lets try some different options.
Lets say mX=mY=m
x(X)=x0-2*x0*m/(m+m)
=x0-2*x0*m/(m*(1+1))
=x0-2*x0/2
=x0-x0
=0


That is the ONLY option you got: by hypothesis, the two boats have equal mass.


BUT DIFFERENT FORCES ARE APPLIED AT EACH END OF THE ROPE.


Your other message is useless.

Here is what you wrote:

Boat X pulls the rope with force F
The rope pulls boat X with force -F.
The rope pulls boat Y with force F.
Boat Y pulls the rope with force -F.

The net force on boat X is -F.
The net force on boat Y is F.
The net force on the rope is F-F=0.



By the very hypothesis, A DOES NOT EQUAL B.

A cannot equal B.

Yet, by using the twisted RE logic, using only a single force acting on boat X (respectively on boat Y), the analysis reaches a point where the absolute value of A equals the absolute value of B. A most direct contradiction of the hypothesis.


The forces applied by you and disputeone are DIFFERENT to start with.


Now, here is the correct FE analysis.

FE analysis

The net force on boat X will be: -200N + 140N

The net force on boat Y will be: -140N + 200N

The net force on the string will be [200N - 140N] + [140N - 200N]


Since the string is not moving, the net force on the string is 0:

[200N - 140N] + [140N - 200N] = 60N - 60N = 0


All forces balance out perfectly.


Do you accept that all force acting on boat X comes from the rope? (for this part I don't care if it is because X is pulling on the rope or Y is, the only important part is that the entirety of the force acting on boat x is being applied to boat X by the rope)

Your tag team partner, sigma, is trying to use same argument, as follows:

If there is tension in the rope due to people pulling on each end then Newton's Third Law requires that at that moment they are pulling with exactly the same force as in an action/reaction pair (forces are equal and opposite).


But a rope can transmit more than one force.

It is very easy to prove this.

IF THE ROPE WAS TRANSMITTING ONLY ONE FORCE, AS JACK AND SIGMA (NOT TO MENTION RABINOZ) WOULD HAVE US BELIEVE, THEN THE TWO BOATS WOULD MEET IN THE MIDDLE. ALWAYS.


Another way to put it:

If the rope was transmitting only one force, then A = B (another way of saying that the boats would meet exactly in the middle).

The converse IS ALSO TRUE: if A = B, then the rope will be transmitting only one force (or in the FE analysis case, the two mentioned forces; the correct FE analysis can handle the case where A = B easily).

If A = B, then the two boats will meet exactly in the middle.


Here is the proof.


The net force on boat x is -A.
The net force on boat y is -B.
The net force on the string is A+B.
As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.



The RE's own analysis, assumed to be the very best that they can come up with, reaches the following conclusion:

As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.


That is: |A|=|B|

If A = B, then the two boats will meet in the middle.


Now, jack, let me remind you of what your friend sigma said earlier where HE AGREES WITH ME.

Remember this?


Quote
The two boats will meet at some point between them.

Agreed for the boat scenario.

You do agree that if the two identical boats pull with different forces, then THEY WILL MEET AT SOME POINT BETWEEN THEM, never exactly in the middle.


Since by the very hypothesis forces A and B are of a different magnitude, the boats will never meet exactly in the middle.

Thus TWO FORCES MUST BE TRANSMITTED THROUGH THE SAME ROPE.

If only one force was being transmitted, then the two boats would meet exactly in the middle.


But they do not.


The two men in the boats will be jackblack and disputeone.

Since jackblack needs to vent his fury at his miserable analysis having been thrashed thoroughly in this thread he will pull extremely hard: 200N (location: boat X).

disputeone is trolling along, he will pull with a force of 140N (location: boat Y).

Of course they will meet not in the middle, but somewhere along the line of the rope.


RE analysis

The net force on boat x is -200N.
The net force on boat y is -140N.
The net force on the string is 200N + 140N.
As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.

We quickly notice the stupendous contradiction which we reach in an instant of a second.


As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.

A = 200N

B = 140N

There is no way that 200N + 140N = 0.

There is no way that 140N = -200N.

It is as simple as this.


Let us remember that the foregoing RE analysis cannot be applied even in a hypothetical case where:

Force A = 100.000,000,000 N

Force B = 100.000,000,001 N

Even in this case B will not be equal to -A.



EQUATIONS DO NOT LIE.


As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.

A = 200N

B = 140N

There is no way that 200N + 140N = 0.

There is no way that 140N = -200N.

It is as simple as this.



FE analysis

The net force on boat X will be: -200N + 140N

The net force on boat Y will be: -140N + 200N

The net force on the string will be [200N - 140N] + [140N - 200N]


Since the string is not moving, the net force on the string is 0:

[200N - 140N] + [140N - 200N] = 60N - 60N = 0


All forces balance out perfectly.

But they include TWICE THE FORCES NEEDED in the Newtonian system.

No contradictions whatsoever.



As the two men pull SIMULTANEOUSLY, two forces will be exerted on boat X at once: -A and B.


EQUATIONS DO NOT LIE.


The RE equation leads to this contradiction:

As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.

A = 200N

B = 140N

There is no way that 200N + 140N = 0.

There is no way that 140N = -200N.

It is as simple as this.


On the other hand, the correct FE analysis leads to the solution:

The net force on boat X will be: -200N + 140N

The net force on boat Y will be: -140N + 200N

The net force on the string will be [200N - 140N] + [140N - 200N]


Since the string is not moving, the net force on the string is 0:

[200N - 140N] + [140N - 200N] = 60N - 60N = 0


All forces balance out perfectly.

But they include TWICE THE FORCES NEEDED in the Newtonian system.

No contradictions whatsoever.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #370 on: May 04, 2017, 09:17:16 PM »
Can we change the topic subject? Maybe to 'Sandokhans BS theories and how they relate to boats and ropes'
Why limit it to "boats and ropes"?

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #371 on: May 04, 2017, 09:38:52 PM »

BUT DIFFERENT FORCES ARE APPLIED AT EACH END OF THE ROPE.

Wake up sandokhan, you cannot apply different magnitude forces to the two ends of a (hypothetical) massless rope.

To me it seems simple common sense, but I'll find numerous references stating the same thing if you wish.

Don't bother replying with pages and pages of the usual.  . . . . . I've seen it all before.

*

disputeone

  • 28101
  • +116/-116
  • Or should I?
Re: Sandokhans BS theories and how they relate to boats and ropes
« Reply #372 on: May 04, 2017, 09:58:14 PM »
Quote from: Sandokhan
The two men in the boats will be jackblack and disputeone.

Since jackblack needs to vent his fury at his miserable analysis having been thrashed thoroughly in this thread he will pull extremely hard: 200N (location: boat X).

disputeone is trolling along, he will pull with a force of 140N (location: boat Y).

If Jack could pull at 200N and I could only pull at 140N then he would simply pull the rope out of my hand. If it was tied to my wrist I would fall in the water.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2017, 10:11:34 PM by disputeone »
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.

?

Twerp

  • Gutter Sniper
  • Flat Earth Almost Believer
  • 6540
  • +0/-0
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #373 on: May 04, 2017, 10:39:44 PM »
Yet, by using the twisted RE logic...

What does this have to do with the shape of the earth?
“Heaven is being governed by Devil nowadays..” - Wise

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7272
  • +7/-41
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #374 on: May 04, 2017, 11:08:17 PM »
you cannot apply different magnitude forces to the two ends of a (hypothetical) massless rope.

The forces applied at each end of the rope will ALWAYS be different.

Certainly you'd be pulling with a different force than, say, jack. Right?


If Jack could pull at 200N and I could only pull at 140N then he would simply pull the rope out of my hand. If it was tied to my wrist I would fall in the water.

No.

Your boat would simply thrust forward, as would his boat.

Remember, you are on water, not on land.


Would you mind explaining and showing with analysis to your readers how the two boats will not meet in the middle?

Sure.

I never said anything about the masses of the two men in those boats. I said the boats were identical, that's all.

Having realized this fact at once, you wrote earlier:


Quote
The two boats will meet at some point between them.

Agreed for the boat scenario.


All of you here are missing the most important point.

Forces A and B can never be the same.

Never.


FORCES A AND B ARE OF DIFFERENT MAGNITUDE BY HYPOTHESIS.

If you are pulling with a force of 200N, and disputeone is pulling with a force of 140N, then A does not equal B.


Go ahead and test with a measuring device your strength down to the 100,000,000th fraction of Newton against all the people in the world.

You won't find an exact match. Absolutely guaranteed.

This is what we are talking about here, what the RE require.

A total match. A perfect match.

This is the absurd requirement of a failed theory.


My analysis suffers from no such requirements. It can even handle the theoretical case where the two forces are perfectly matched down to the 100,000,000th fraction of a Newton.

By contrast, the RE's own analysis CANNOT EVEN HANDLE a basic infinitesimal difference at the level of a 100,000,000th fraction of a Newton. A totally failed theory.



But the RE are requiring that the two forces be exactly the same.

Boat X pulls the rope with force F
The rope pulls boat X with force -F.
The rope pulls boat Y with force F.
Boat Y pulls the rope with force -F.


jack is pulling with 200 N force (force A).

disputeone is pulling with a force of 140 N (force B).

Does force A equal force B?

Certainly not.

That is why the RE analysis amounts to pure thrash.

It is worthless.

It is useless.


My analysis takes into account both forces applied.


Let us remember the twisted logic applied by jack earlier.

So? That means the reaction force from me pulling will be in the same direction as the force disputeone is applying.
That means they would be in the same direction.


But, at the same time, disputeone IS ALSO PULLING ON JACK'S BOAT.

A second force applied.

Totally unaccounted for by the bumbling RE analysis.

The reaction force from him pulling will be in the same direction as the force jack IS APPLYING AT THE VERY SAME TIME.


It is as simple as this.


Here is the catastrophic RE analysis WHICH WILL ALWAYS VIOLATE/DEFY THE HYPOTHESIS: forces A and B are of a different magnitude to start with.

The net force on boat x is -A.
The net force on boat y is -B.
The net force on the string is A+B.
As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.



The RE's own analysis, assumed to be the very best that they can come up with, reaches the following conclusion:

As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.


That is: |A|=|B|


The correct analysis has to take into account BOTH FORCES APPLIED AT EACH END, A AND B.

Two different forces.

Of a different magnitude.


The RE analysis is completely useless as it violates/defies the clearly stated hypothesis each and every time.

The hypothesis: FORCES A AND B ARE DIFFERENT, OF A DIFFERENT MAGNITUDE.

jack is pulling with 200 N.

disputeone is pulling with 140 N.

200 N does not equal 140 N.

Yet the RE analysis requires that |A|=|B| which is a complete nonsense.

*

disputeone

  • 28101
  • +116/-116
  • Or should I?
Re: Sandokhans BS theories and how they relate to boats and ropes
« Reply #375 on: May 04, 2017, 11:16:40 PM »
Quote from: dispute
If Jack could pull at 200N and I could only pull at 140N then he would simply pull the rope out of my hand. If it was tied to my wrist I would fall in the water.

Quote from: Sandokhan
No.

Your boat would simply thrust forward, as would his boat.

Remember, you are on water, not on land.

Never played tug of war?

If Jack pulls with 200N I need to pull with 200N or else the rope comes out of my hand or I fall over.

« Last Edit: May 04, 2017, 11:19:15 PM by disputeone »
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7272
  • +7/-41
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #376 on: May 04, 2017, 11:41:18 PM »
You seem not to understand basic physics.

You have two boats PULLING TOWARD EACH OTHER ON WATER, ON A LAKE.

Not on land.

Wake up disputeone!

The forces that you and jack will be applying will be different.

He will apply a force of 200 N.

You will exert a force of 140 N.

As simple as this.

Both boats will start to move toward each other.


FORCES A AND B ARE OF DIFFERENT MAGNITUDE BY HYPOTHESIS.

If you are pulling with a force of 200N, and disputeone is pulling with a force of 140N, then A does not equal B.


Go ahead and test with a measuring device your strength down to the 100,000,000th fraction of Newton against all the people in the world.

You won't find an exact match. Absolutely guaranteed.

This is what we are talking about here, what the RE require.

A total match. A perfect match.

This is the absurd requirement of a failed theory.


My analysis suffers from no such requirements. It can even handle the theoretical case where the two forces are perfectly matched down to the 100,000,000th fraction of a Newton.

By contrast, the RE's own analysis CANNOT EVEN HANDLE a basic infinitesimal difference at the level of a 100,000,000th fraction of a Newton. A totally failed theory.



But the RE are requiring that the two forces be exactly the same.

Boat X pulls the rope with force F
The rope pulls boat X with force -F.
The rope pulls boat Y with force F.
Boat Y pulls the rope with force -F.


jack is pulling with 200 N force (force A).

disputeone is pulling with a force of 140 N (force B).

Does force A equal force B?

Certainly not.

That is why the RE analysis amounts to pure thrash.

It is worthless.

It is useless.


Again, here is the catastrophic RE analysis WHICH WILL ALWAYS VIOLATE/DEFY THE HYPOTHESIS: forces A and B are of a different magnitude to start with.

The net force on boat x is -A.
The net force on boat y is -B.
The net force on the string is A+B.
As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.



The RE's own analysis, assumed to be the very best that they can come up with, reaches the following conclusion:

As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.


That is: |A|=|B|


The correct analysis has to take into account BOTH FORCES APPLIED AT EACH END, A AND B.

Two different forces.

Of a different magnitude.


The RE analysis is completely useless as it violates/defies the clearly stated hypothesis each and every time.

The hypothesis: FORCES A AND B ARE DIFFERENT, OF A DIFFERENT MAGNITUDE.

jack is pulling with 200 N.

disputeone is pulling with 140 N.

200 N does not equal 140 N.

Yet the RE analysis requires that |A|=|B| which is a complete nonsense.

*

disputeone

  • 28101
  • +116/-116
  • Or should I?
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #377 on: May 04, 2017, 11:47:50 PM »
You seem not to understand basic physics.

Actually it's a funny story.
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.

*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Sandokhans BS theories and how they relate to boats and ropes
« Reply #378 on: May 05, 2017, 12:34:10 AM »
If Jack could pull at 200N and I could only pull at 140N then he would simply pull the rope out of my hand. If it was tied to my wrist I would fall in the water.
Not necessarily.
There is always a weakest point.
You could have been tied to the boat. It might just pull your arm off, but I don't think 200 N would be enough for that... its only roughly 20 kgf.

*

disputeone

  • 28101
  • +116/-116
  • Or should I?
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #379 on: May 05, 2017, 12:35:56 AM »
Lmao.

Not my arm please ;D ;D.
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.

*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Sandokhans BS ideas and how they relate to boats and ropes
« Reply #380 on: May 05, 2017, 12:51:01 AM »
jack, wake up!

Your equations AMOUNT TO NOTHING.
No. They show the reality of the situation.

IN THE RE ANALYSIS THE TWO BOATS HAVE TO MEET IN THE MIDDLE.
Yes, 2 boats, of the same mass (ignoring other force) will always meet in the middle, just like in reality (although that gets more complicated with different forces like resistance of motion through the water).

So no failure at all.

But don't worry, your "analysis" reaches the same conclusion, that the 2 boats meet in the middle.
So you are just objecting to your own analysis and claims.

There is no working around that.
And there is no need to.

The forces applied are the SAME in your analysis.
Yes, because I care about matching reality, which means the 2 forces will be the same.

That is the ONLY option you got: by hypothesis, the two boats have equal mass.


BUT DIFFERENT FORCES ARE APPLIED AT EACH END OF THE ROPE.
Again, this is your baseless claim which makes the situation impossible.
In reality, the 2 forces will be the same.

Your text book even agrees with me. 2 identical boats meet in the middle. It is only when you make one boat large and the other small that they don't.
So your book is in perfect agreement with me and is contradicting you.

If you think they can meet anywhere other than the middle, why don't you try justifying it?
Especially as the net force on the 2 boats are equal and opposite.

Your other message is useless.
Are you just saying that because it completely destroyed any chance of you refuting me?

Here is what you wrote:
Like I said, if you have an objection state which point it is, why you object, and what you think the correct answer is and why.

By the very hypothesis, A DOES NOT EQUAL B.

A cannot equal B.
It doesn't equal B. A=-B.
Of course, you will object to that as well. But as you are only objecting to point 16, I take that to mean you fully accept all prior points.
The issue then is that was point 15.
It shows quite clearly that A=-B, and that your baseless claim about the situation is completely wrong.
In reality, the forces are equal but opposite.

Stop just appealing to your bullshit baseless claim. It is wrong. I know it is wrong. This shows that it is wrong.

This is basically your argument:
"YOU SAID THIS.
I SAY THAT IS WRONG.
SO YOU ARE WRONG!!!."

You are just baselessly asserting that I am wrong without justifying it at all.
On the other hand, I have shown quite explicitly why your claim is wrong.

Go through the questions I asked, and tell me what the first one you disagree with and why.

The forces applied by you and disputeone are DIFFERENT to start with.
No. They aren't. Get that through your thick skull.
Continuing to repeat the same refuted bullshit doesn't make your case any better. It just makes you look more and more pathetic.

Do you accept that all force acting on boat X comes from the rope? (for this part I don't care if it is because X is pulling on the rope or Y is, the only important part is that the entirety of the force acting on boat x is being applied to boat X by the rope)

Your tag team partner, sigma, is trying to use same argument, as follows:
And you still refuse to answer.
Why is that? Is it because you know that doing so will show you to be full of shit?

But a rope can transmit more than one force.
No. It can't.
By the very nature of how it works, a rope anchored/pulled at 2 points (1 point at each end) in opposite directions will result in the rope being under tension and applying a force equal in magnitude to the tension in the rope.
That is the sole force the rope transmits.

It is very easy to prove this.

IF THE ROPE WAS TRANSMITTING ONLY ONE FORCE, AS JACK AND SIGMA (NOT TO MENTION RABINOZ) WOULD HAVE US BELIEVE, THEN THE TWO BOATS WOULD MEET IN THE MIDDLE. ALWAYS.
No. It is impossible to prove your baseless bullshit.
They only meet in the middle if they are identical. If they are different (e.g. different mass), they don't meet in the middle.
But that is also the result of your analysis.

Here is the proof.
The net force on boat x is -A.
The net force on boat y is -B.
The net force on the string is A+B.
As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.

The RE's own analysis, assumed to be the very best that they can come up with, reaches the following conclusion:
As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.
That is: |A|=|B|
If A = B, then the two boats will meet in the middle.
And here is what the proof is based upon your analysis (with some irrelevant crap removed and slightly corrected):
The net force on boat x is -A+B.
The net force on boat y is -B+A.

The flatards' own analysis, assumed to be the very best pathetic bullshit that they can come up with to try and deny reality, reaches the following conclusion:
|-A+B|=|-B+A|

If |-A+B|=|-B+A|, then the two boats will meet in the middle.


So congratulations, your own analysis shows they meet in the middle.

Now, jack, let me remind you of what your friend sigma said earlier where HE AGREES WITH ME.
Just because he agrees with a single point doesn't mean he agrees entirely.

Remember this?
Quote
The two boats will meet at some point between them.
Agreed for the boat scenario.
Yes. Do you?
He was stating that if you have 2 boats of different masses they will meet at some point between them.
He is not saying that if you have 2 identical boats that they can meet anywhere other than in the middle.

Stop lying about what people are saying.

You do agree that if the two identical boats pull with different forces, then THEY WILL MEET AT SOME POINT BETWEEN THEM, never exactly in the middle.
No. They won't.
They pretty much wont meet at all.
The rope will fly off one of the boats as it was not applying enough force to hold it there.
It is only if the 2 boats apply equal and opposite forces that the string remains.

If you go to reality instead, it then gets more complicated due to other forces acting.

Since by the very hypothesis forces A and B are of a different magnitude, the boats will never meet exactly in the middle.
Again, that is just your baseless claim, and your analysis shows it to be wrong.
You end up with the 2 boats pulling with the same magnitude force (which you don't explicitly state and refuse to answer questions on), and the same magnitude net force on the boats, resulting in them meeting in the middle.

But they do not.
Prove it.
You are yet to do this, and your analysis shows that they will.

Since jackblack needs to vent his fury at his miserable analysis having been thrashed thoroughly in this thread he will pull extremely hard: 200N (location: boat X).
You mean since jackblack is determined to keep beating this dead horse until it flees like pathetic coward or finally gets some life and starts mounting a rational defence, he will pull with 200 N.

disputeone is trolling along, he will pull with a force of 140N (location: boat Y).
And thus gets the rope pulled straight out of his hand as not enough force was applied to hold it there (in fact, he is just helping it along).

Of course they will meet not in the middle, but somewhere along the line of the rope.
Of course they will not meet in the middle, as the rope goes flying and they are no longer connected so they don't meet at all.

We quickly notice the stupendous contradiction which we reach in an instant of a second.
No, we quickly the notice the stupendous error you made by asserting that A and B are different in magnitude when they have to be the same.

There is no way that 200N + 140N = 0.
That's right, which means your situation is pure bullshit. It is physically impossible.

Let us remember that the foregoing RE analysis cannot be applied even in a hypothetical case where:
Force A = 100.000,000,000 N
Force B = 100.000,000,001 N
Even in this case B will not be equal to -A.
That's right, but again, that isn't the situation the RE analysis applies to.

In this case, both people are pulling on the rope in the same direction.
What this means is that there is no tension at all unless the rope goes past and attaches to something applying a force of -200 N.

Do you not understand that we are dealing with non-scalar quantities? Where direction (and thus sign) matters?

That if 2 people are pulling in opposite directions, then one force will be >0 and the other will be <0.


EQUATIONS DO NOT LIE.
But you do, and you use the equations you are lying about to help.

There is no way that 200N + 140N = 0.
And as equations don't lie, this shows that this situation is impossible.
A possible situation would be when A=200 N and B = -200 N.

All forces balance out perfectly.
No they don't.
You have an action reaction pair between the rope and X.
X is applying a force of A to the rope.
The rope is applying a force of A-B to boat X.

For them to balance you need these to be equal but opposite, i.e.:
-A=-A+B.
Or putting in your numbers:
-200 N = -200 N + 140 N.
They will never be equal.
140 N will never equal 0.
Thus you have unbalanced forces and a completely impossible situation.

So no, plenty of contradictions.

The forces applied at each end of the rope will ALWAYS be different.

Certainly you'd be pulling with a different force than, say, jack. Right?
No. You are completely wrong.
The forces applied at each end of a mass-less rope under tension will always be equal.
Certainly he would be pulling with a force equal but opposite me.

No.
Your boat would simply thrust forward, as would his boat.
Nope. That requires him to apply the force to the boat, he would need to apply all 200 N.
If he can't, then the rope flies out of his hand.

Remember, you are on water, not on land.
So?
Inertia alone is enough to make it impossible. You don't need the added friction of the land.

A simple example, get a rope and tape something heavy too it. Now spin it around going faster and faster. Eventually you spin it too fast and the tape is no longer able to apply the force needed to accelerate the object and the rope comes out of the tape.

I never said anything about the masses of the two men in those boats. I said the boats were identical, that's all.
And in my analysis the mass of the men was included in the boats. mX is not just the mass of the boat itself, it is the mass of the boat and everything in it, including the person or people pulling the rope.
So if they boats are identical but the people aren't, then mX!=mY and thus they do not meet in the middle.

So do you agree that 2 identical boats with identical people being pulled together by a rope will always meet in the middle?

All of you here are missing the most important point.

Forces A and B can never be the same.
No. We understand fulling that that "point" is pure bullshit.
A and B must always be equal and opposite. Otherwise there is a net force on the rope and it goes flying out of someone's hand.

Never.
ALWAYS

FORCES A AND B ARE OF DIFFERENT MAGNITUDE BY HYPOTHESIS.
No, by baseless claim.

If you wish to make that your hypothesis, then fine, your hypothesis is bullshit and doesn't match reality at all. It is a failed hypothesis that any sane person would have discarded long ago.

If you are pulling with a force of 200N, and disputeone is pulling with a force of 140N, then A does not equal B.
And the situation doesn't exist in reality.

Go ahead and test with a measuring device your strength down to the 100,000,000th fraction of Newton against all the people in the world.

You won't find an exact match. Absolutely guaranteed.
The limit of your strength, or just when you are trying to apply it to the same rope?
If the latter, then yes, you will, every time you ever measure it it will be an exact match.

The simplest way to measure it is with a spring scale.
This works quite simply, you hook it onto something and pull. It doesn't even matter which way you put it. It tells you how much force you are applying (typically in kgf or lbf). And guess what? Because of how it works, it means you don't even need to bother with the rope. You can just each grab an end and pull.
As it only has one scale it needs to be the same. There isn't a separate measurement for how much each side is pulling, because they need to be equal.

Go try it.
See if you can find any situation where you don't end up with a perfect match.

This is what we are talking about here, what the RE require.
Yes, which is also what reality requires.

This is the absurd requirement of a failed theory.
No. As it matches reality, it is a good theory, which works.

My analysis suffers from no such requirements. It can even handle the theoretical case where the two forces are perfectly matched down to the 100,000,000th fraction of a Newton.
No. It fails, spectacularly.
With you ignoring direction you get a result of if the 2 are pulling with an equal force, the boats don't move at all.
But it remains unbalanced and full of contradiction.

By contrast, the RE's own analysis CANNOT EVEN HANDLE a basic infinitesimal difference at the level of a 100,000,000th fraction of a Newton. A totally failed theory.
Yes, because that doesn't happen in reality, showing how the theory matches reality, so a perfectly fine theory.

jack is pulling with 200 N force (force A).
disputeone is pulling with a force of 140 N (force B).
Does force A equal force B?
Certainly not.
That is why the RE analysis amounts to pure thrash.
No. That is why your completely delusional scenario amounts to pure trash, because it isn't realistic at all.

In order for it to be real, the 2 forces need to be the same.

So? That means the reaction force from me pulling will be in the same direction as the force disputeone is applying.
That means they would be in the same direction.


But, at the same time, disputeone IS ALSO PULLING ON JACK'S BOAT.
That was the "force disputeone is applying"
So no, not "at the same time, blah"
I already covered that.

Regardless, that was being applied to your delusional, completely unrealistic scenario.

A second force applied.
Totally unaccounted for by the bumbling RE analysis.
Because it doesn't exist in reality.

Yet the RE analysis requires that |A|=|B| which is a complete nonsense.
No. Your delusional scenario has |A|!=|B| which makes it completely nonsense.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2017, 12:54:16 AM by JackBlack »

*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #381 on: May 05, 2017, 12:53:19 AM »
Lmao.

Not my arm please ;D ;D.
For a more philosophical question, if you take a person and split them at the neck, are you cutting off their head, cutting off their body or something else?

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #382 on: May 05, 2017, 01:11:06 AM »
You seem not to understand basic physics.
You have two boats PULLING TOWARD EACH OTHER ON WATER, ON A LAKE.
Not on land.
Who cares if it's land or water?
You seem do not to understand basic physics.

Quote from: sandokhan
Wake up disputeone!
The forces that you and jack will be applying will be different.
He will apply a force of 200 N. You will exert a force of 140 N.

As simple as this.

Both boats will start to move toward each other.

FORCES A AND B ARE OF DIFFERENT MAGNITUDE BY HYPOTHESIS.
Maybe "FORCES A AND B ARE OF DIFFERENT MAGNITUDE BY HYPOTHESIS" but that hypothesis is invalid, as hypotheses easily can be.
And that readily leads to a Reductio ad absurdum type of poof that you must be wrong!

Try again!

*

disputeone

  • 28101
  • +116/-116
  • Or should I?
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #383 on: May 05, 2017, 01:16:49 AM »
Lmao.

Not my arm please ;D ;D.
For a more philosophical question, if you take a person and split them at the neck, are you cutting off their head, cutting off their body or something else?

That's deep.

The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao; The name that can be named is not the eternal name. The nameless is the beginning of heaven and earth.

@Sandokhan I don't claim to understand physics, I do, however have a very good practical and mathematical understanding of forces, loads and ropes, what you are saying is wrong, anyone can test it.



I am sorry.
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7272
  • +7/-41
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #384 on: May 05, 2017, 01:29:31 AM »
You have an action reaction pair between the rope and X.
X is applying a force of A to the rope.
The rope is applying a force of A-B to boat X.


You do not know how to properly apply the forces.

What are the forces acting on boat X?

At the same time, boat Y is pulling on the rope (the rope of course is pulling on boat X) and the man in boat X is applying force A to the rope.

Two forces acting on boat X: -A and B


What are the forces acting on the rope, coming from boat X?

The reaction forces: A and -B


It doesn't take much to see that you are clueless when it comes to solving this problem.


Forces A and B can never be the same.

Never.


FORCES A AND B ARE OF DIFFERENT MAGNITUDE BY HYPOTHESIS.

If you are pulling with a force of 200N, and disputeone is pulling with a force of 140N, then A does not equal B.


How can 200N equal 140N?


Here is your bumbling analysis, which does not take into account the two forces of DIFFERENT MAGNITUDE which are applied to start with.


Boat X pulls the rope with force F
The rope pulls boat X with force -F.
The rope pulls boat Y with force F.
Boat Y pulls the rope with force -F.


jack is pulling with 200 N force (force A).

disputeone is pulling with a force of 140 N (force B).

Does force A equal force B?

Certainly not.

That is why the RE analysis amounts to pure thrash.

It is worthless.

It is useless.


Here is the catastrophic RE analysis WHICH WILL ALWAYS VIOLATE/DEFY THE HYPOTHESIS: forces A and B are of a different magnitude to start with.

The net force on boat x is -A.
The net force on boat y is -B.
The net force on the string is A+B.
As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.



The RE's own analysis, assumed to be the very best that they can come up with, reaches the following conclusion:

As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.


That is: |A|=|B|


It takes a brute and crudish understanding of science to state that |A|=|B| when jack is pulling with 200 N (force A) and disputeone is pulling with 140N (force B).

The absolute value of 200 does not equal the absolute value of 140.

Not even closely.

A most direct and basic contradiction which nullifies your catastrophic analysis jack.

Your analysis is useless and worthless.


The correct analysis has to take into account BOTH FORCES APPLIED AT EACH END, A AND B.

Two different forces.

Of a different magnitude.


The hypothesis: FORCES A AND B ARE DIFFERENT, OF A DIFFERENT MAGNITUDE.

jack is pulling with 200 N.

disputeone is pulling with 140 N.

200 N does not equal 140 N.

Yet the RE analysis requires that |A|=|B| which is a complete nonsense.

*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #385 on: May 05, 2017, 01:32:50 AM »
Lmao.

Not my arm please ;D ;D.
For a more philosophical question, if you take a person and split them at the neck, are you cutting off their head, cutting off their body or something else?

That's deep.

The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao; The name that can be named is not the eternal name. The nameless is the beginning of heaven and earth.
Perhaps a similar question, more on topic:
If we take these boats, with boat X at position x, and boat Y at position Y, and then switch the pieces of them one by one, which boat is which? is the one at x still X, or has it become Y?

Or if we just replace the parts of boat X piece by piece, is it still the same boat?

*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #386 on: May 05, 2017, 01:38:41 AM »
You have an action reaction pair between the rope and X.
X is applying a force of A to the rope.
The rope is applying a force of A-B to boat X.


You do not know how to properly apply the forces.
Nope. That would be you.

What are the forces acting on boat X?
According to me, it is purely a force based upon the tension in the rope.
This is a force of -A.
This perfectly balances the force X is pulling on the rope with, A.

So no contradiction there (or anywhere else between my analysis and reality).

According to your analysis, you have the reaction force of X pulling on the rope, with a force of -A, as well as the force that Y is applying via the rope=B.
That means the rope is applying a force of -A+B to X, while X is only pulling on the rope with a force of A. This makes it completely unbalanced, (unless B is 0, and then from similar analysis A is 0).
Completely contradicting reality.

What are the forces acting on the rope, coming from boat X?

The reaction forces: A and -B
So you accept that boat X is pulling on the rope with a force of A-B?
Yes or no?


I will skip the rest of your nonsense this time.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7272
  • +7/-41
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #387 on: May 05, 2017, 01:59:38 AM »
According to me, it is purely a force based upon the tension in the rope.

You have created a world of your own making, where you are making up your own rules as go along.

This is called cognitive dissonance.

You are unable to digest reality.

When reality is too much for you, your refuge is creating your own formulas, your own little fantasy world, where you can feel safe.


This is a force of -A.
This perfectly balances the force X is pulling on the rope with, A.


Not if disputeone is pulling from the other side with 140 N.

That would be force B.

Totally different in magnitude from your own applied force of 200 N.


If disputeone is pulling from boat Y, then you need to calculate the impact of this force upon boat X.


According to your analysis, you have the reaction force of X pulling on the rope, with a force of -A, as well as the force that Y is applying via the rope=B.
That means the rope is applying a force of -A+B to X, while X is only pulling on the rope with a force of A.


The first part is true.

But not the second part: again, to feel safe, you are creating your own fantasy world.

Disputeone is pulling on boat X with a force of 140 N.

Can you understand this basic fact?

Are you able to understand it?


What are the forces acting on boat X?

At the same time, boat Y is pulling on the rope (the rope of course is pulling on boat X) and the man in boat X is applying force A to the rope.

Two forces acting on boat X: -A and B


What are the forces acting on the rope, coming from boat X?

The reaction forces: A and -B



Forces A and B can never be the same.

Never.


FORCES A AND B ARE OF DIFFERENT MAGNITUDE BY HYPOTHESIS.

If you are pulling with a force of 200N, and disputeone is pulling with a force of 140N, then A does not equal B.


How can the absolute value of 200N equal the absolute value of 140N?


Here is your bumbling analysis, which does not take into account the two forces of DIFFERENT MAGNITUDE which are applied to start with.


Boat X pulls the rope with force F
The rope pulls boat X with force -F.
The rope pulls boat Y with force F.
Boat Y pulls the rope with force -F.


jack is pulling with 200 N force (force A).

disputeone is pulling with a force of 140 N (force B).

Does force A equal force B?

Certainly not.

That is why the RE analysis amounts to pure thrash.

It is worthless.

It is useless.


Here is the catastrophic RE analysis WHICH WILL ALWAYS VIOLATE/DEFY THE HYPOTHESIS: forces A and B are of a different magnitude to start with.

The net force on boat x is -A.
The net force on boat y is -B.
The net force on the string is A+B.
As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.



The RE's own analysis, assumed to be the very best that they can come up with, reaches the following conclusion:

As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.


That is: |A|=|B|


It takes a brute and crudish understanding of science to state that |A|=|B| when jack is pulling with 200 N (force A) and disputeone is pulling with 140N (force B).

The absolute value of 200 does not equal the absolute value of 140.

Not even closely.

A most direct and basic contradiction which nullifies your catastrophic analysis jack.

Your analysis is useless and worthless.


The correct analysis has to take into account BOTH FORCES APPLIED AT EACH END, A AND B.

Two different forces.

Of a different magnitude.


The hypothesis: FORCES A AND B ARE DIFFERENT, OF A DIFFERENT MAGNITUDE.

jack is pulling with 200 N.

disputeone is pulling with 140 N.

200 N does not equal 140 N.

Yet the RE analysis requires that |A|=|B| which is a complete nonsense.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #388 on: May 05, 2017, 02:08:33 AM »

The hypothesis: FORCES A AND B ARE DIFFERENT, OF A DIFFERENT MAGNITUDE.

And
the hypothesis: FORCES A AND B ARE DIFFERENT, OF A DIFFERENT MAGNITUDE.
is an invalid hypothesis!

*

disputeone

  • 28101
  • +116/-116
  • Or should I?
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #389 on: May 05, 2017, 02:10:56 AM »
The hypothesis: FORCES A AND B ARE DIFFERENT, OF A DIFFERENT MAGNITUDE.

jack is pulling with 200 N.

disputeone is pulling with 140 N.

200 N does not equal 140 N.

Yet the RE analysis requires that |A|=|B| which is a complete nonsense.

Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.