rabinoz = jackblack

Rule #3

3. Multiple Accounts
Do not create alternate accounts ('alts').

3. Multiple Accounts 
Automatic ban. A minimum ban of 1 month will be placed on the original account; the alternative account will be banned permanently.


rabinoz has just stated that he and jackblack are one and the same person.

A force pointing towards the centre is enough to produce circular motion.

Immediately, I pointed out the huge error committed by jackblack in this statement.

A force pointing towards the centre is enough to produce circular motion.

It cannot be.

What you are saying is that the nebular motion started by itself, based only on attractive gravity.

This cannot be so, since the radial component does not cause torque, a force needed to start the rotation of the nebula.

What force caused the nebula TO ROTATE? This is what you are feverishly avoiding to answer.

So, a huge misrepresentation your part: the radial component cannot cause rotation, only torque can do so, that is, the other components of the acceleration equation must come into play.

But now, rabinoz says HE WROTE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE, not jackblack:

Quote from: sandokhan on March 16, 2019, 03:38:57 AM

A force pointing towards the centre is enough to produce circular motion.

I guess I should have written that out in as "A force pointing towards the centre is enough to maintain circular motion."
Sorry about that. So I'll ignore all the nebular motion stuff for now.

rabinoz has just stated that HE WROTE THE MESSAGE POSTED EARLIER by jackblack.

jackblack is rabinoz's alt!

Here are the images to prove it:





Even "centre" is spelled the same.

jackblack is rabinoz's alt.

They are both from Australia. Of course they spell "centre" the same way. And I don't for one second actually think they are the same person. Nor is there anything conclusive actually demonstrating so.

They must the same since rabinoz SAID SO: he stated that he wrote the statement assigned to jackblack.





It is unbelievable that you are defending this blatant defiance of the Rules of this Forum.

The rules must apply to everyone.

rabinoz has just stated that he wrote the message written by jackblack.

John and SpaceCowGirl, as administrators, you must apply the rules as they have to be obeyed by everyone.

Perhaps if you used the quote function properly, they wouldn't be confused about who said what. They don't have matching IP addresses, they don't behave the same way, and there really is no indication that one is an alt of the other.

Do not blame any quote function.

Obviously he is using a proxy to post messages for both accounts. The change of style is done on purpose.

There is no confusion whatsoever.

Take a look at what rabinoz wrote: he was responding TO HIS OWN QUOTE.

He just forgot he wrote it minutes earlier under jackblack's name.

What is incredible is that you are actually defending this kind of behaviour, which tells a lot about this place.

Let's see what john and scg have to say.

An obvious and direct proof of using an alt:



"I GUESS I SHOULD HAVE WRITTEN THAT OUT AS..."

THE WORD "I" USED TWICE.

HE EVEN APOLOGIZES FOR THE ORIGINAL STATEMENT.



And you are saying that there is no indication of an alt, when it is starring you in the face?

I'm not blaming the quote function. I'm calling it a missed opportunity for the would-be user of the quote function to more clearly indicate who they are addressing, thus avoiding future confusion while engaged in a debate with multiple people in the same thread.

Let's see what john and scg have to say.

Sounds good to me.

You are shifting the blame to someone else. I was not even addressing rabinoz within that thread at all.

He voluntarily quoted what he wrote earlier under his own alt, jackblack.

You never sanction the constant trolling, the obvious and blatant defiances of the rules, nothing else can attract your attention.

Yet, here you are all of a sudden defending the use of an alt, making sure you sow the seeds of confusion where there are none.

rabinoz simply quoted HIS OWN WORDS written under the name jackblack.

I was not addressing him at all.

He even apologized for it.

He simply forgot he wrote it under the guise of an alt just minutes earlier.

Rab ALWAYS inserts himself into conversations like that. It's what he does. You aren't exactly new here, so I'm not telling you anything you don't know. And he can't possibly be the alt of every REer that he has ever piggybacked into an argument with.

You are not rabinoz's lawyer.

Not everyone's alt: just jackblack's alt, as proven by his own statement (are there anymore alts of rabinoz roaming around? there might be.)

That statement was written earlier by jackblack, not by anybody else.

No confusion was possible.

He recognized his own quote, but forgot he wrote it under the guise of an alt (jackblack).

He blew his own cover.

And you are actually defending this, instead of applying the rules as you should be doing.

We shall see what the council determines.

Rule #3

3. Multiple Accounts
Do not create alternate accounts ('alts').

3. Multiple Accounts 
Automatic ban. A minimum ban of 1 month will be placed on the original account; the alternative account will be banned permanently.

Just get this straight, Mr Sandokhan, JackBlack and I are NOT the same person.

End of story!

Stop the miserable charade.

John and/or Scg, the rules are very clear: a permanent ban for the alt (jackblack) and a one month ban for rabinoz for having pulled this trick for so long.

You quoted another statement, made by what seemed to be another user, AS YOUR VERY OWN.

YOU EVEN APOLOGIZED FOR IT.

Remember?



Voluntarily, you QUOTED jackblack's STATEMENT, AS YOUR VERY OWN.

YOU APOLOGIZED FOR IT. YOU EXPOUNDED ON IT.

You are not fooling anybody here anymore.

It's not enough evidence to ban someone for an alt.

It's much more than enough.

For once, rabinoz FORGOT he had used an alt, just minutes earlier, and quoted a statement made by that alt, AS HIS VERY OWN.

He apologized for it, and expounded on it.

No confusion whatsoever.

Now, you do as you please, but the rules are very clear.

Most likely, rabinoz has more than one alt, and has been fooling everyone here for years.

But now the charade is over.

There is no way he would have quoted that sentence were it not his very own.

There is no way he would have quoted that sentence were it not his very own.

Yes there is!
You never bother to identify who you quote from.
I realised that the the statement "A force pointing towards the centre is enough to produce circular motion" was misleading and I had made a similar statement in

simply equating the gravitational acceleration to the centripetal acceleration does not lead to a stable circular orbit.

So in my opinion the claims I had made based on it were not sufficiently precise. Hence the apology.

If you don't believe that, tough!

There was no dialogue between me and you in that thread at all.

YOU VOLUNTARILY offered yourself to expound on your former statement posted under the guise of your alt.

You are not fooling anybody here anymore.

You never bother to identify who you quote from.

Do not use this poor excuse to get away with using an alt, in full defiance of the rules of this forum, for so long.

I repeat: we were not having a conversation in that thread at all.

YOU SIMPLY RECOGNIZED THAT QUOTE AS YOUR VERY OWN AND EXPOUNDED ON IT.

For once, for just once, you forgot you posted that statement from another account, your alt.

Here are the undeniable facts:



There was no dialogue between me and you whatsoever.

You then voluntarily posted this:



How in the world can you blame the quote function, when obviously YOU RECOGNIZED THAT STATEMENT AS YOUR VERY OWN, and simply expounded on it, and apologized for it?

You simply forgot you posted it some minutes earlier from another account, that is all.

Why are the rules regarding an alt not applied in this case?

Look Sandokhan makes some interesting points but Rabinoz has made a very strong and very powerful denial.

Our investigation is complete.  We have determined that there is only a 65% chance that Jack Black is an alt of Rab.  Not enough to act on.