Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 01/07/2019 in all areas

  1. 1 point
    Pure ad hominem. Entirely lacking in rational argument.
  2. 1 point
    Prove that the disk rolls without slipping on the bottom of the groove. Show your work. No more unsupported assertions.
  3. 1 point
    Both you and Jon are so inept that you asserted the disk rolls without slipping on the bottom of the groove. Its circumference is about 20% longer than the distance along the wires, which proves you are both wrong.
  4. 1 point
    See, you are looking without seeing. You have a preconception ("lack circumference to roll true...") of how the wheels *should* be turning, and missing what is there. You cannot see the two points on the circumferences taking a longer/shorter path to return to the bottom point? The outer one moving further and therefore moving faster? In order for both to return simultaneously?
  5. 1 point
    Blah, small potatoes. Tony was experimenting with ideas of Darrell's cones and funnels mimicking a large wheel and small wheel. Weeks ago. Of course the first thing to do is to level the ends.
  6. 1 point
    Desperately seeking slippage
  7. 1 point
    Here's a suggestion. Enough mathematizing, go observe a wheel turn. There cannot be "slippage", and guess why? A wheel is an integrated whole and every point on every different radius within it, is moving at a specific, different, tangential velocity -- As would do an internal wheel, positioned on any radius. The ONLY way you'll have your slippage, is for the internal velocities to be all equal (oh, but that's what you think). Then, the only way to try to attain slippage, would be to place a physical track under the inside wheel for it to slip on (oh, but then its different tangential speed will cause drag, and stop both wheels).
  8. 1 point
    Yeah, probably. But wouldn't it be great if she left behind a marginal note in a book on Kant, reading "here's where modern art came from"? At least then we'd know if her claim had anything to do with his concept of the Sublime. Maybe it had to do with something else altogether. How about here: If we wish to discern whether anything is beautiful or not, we do not refer the representation of it to the object by means of understanding with a view to cognition, but by means of the imagination (acting perhaps in conjunction with understanding) we refer the representation to the subject and its feeling of pleasure or displeasure. The judgement of taste, therefore, is not a cognitive judgement, and so not logical, but is aesthetic−which means that it is one whose determining ground cannot be other than subjective. With the letters BS double underlined in Rand's hand in the margin. And BASTARD at the bottom of the page. If only.
  9. 1 point
    God bless President Trump! God bless President Trump! and God bless President Trump! Ivanka Trump 2024 after President Trump wins all 50 states in the Union ( guaranteed ) , yeah , yeah , even California folks. I’m the same guy who predicted on this thread numerous times how shorting Apple stock was the play of the decade and Apple just lost $450 billion market cap. Naysayers , naysayers , where art thou , naysayers ? Have you left with William ? And to any of my Jewish brothers and sisters , how any of you could ever vote Democrat again after Trumps Jerusalem move , literally disgust me . God bless America and God bless MY President , Donald Trump