http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric/
Any questions?
And what does it do to the energy comparison when you run the numbers through as I did and suggested he do?
Yeah.
You honestly don’t understand the difference between the error discussed in that story and what is being discussed here?
Really dude??? LOL … That’s my question chief.
Do you really not understand the difference? 
Well, you two won’t get the same answers since you chose different weights and speeds (absolute values and proportionally). Your sleight of hand did not go undetected.
I trace the phenomenon back to before Bill even ran for POTUS, to Gary Hart who, acccording to a quote some attribute to Kennedy and others to Hollings, changed his mind on offshore drilling.
When another charismatic southerner and skirt chaser came along a few in the media decided to sell their journalistic souls to protect him and make sure Clinton could win (even then it took the collusion of Perot … who many seem to forget got out once the Democrats seemed to have their acts together but jumped back in once Bill was in trouble).
But with Bill they soon learned it was about a lot more than sex, but by then he basically owned them.
To make a long, long story short what really ended up happening is that the investment that the Left made in them being right on Clinton meant they must never be wrong. Both the ones who initially turned a blind eye, those who followed suit realizing that the media could swing an election that way, and those they’ve mentored in and out of the media are invested and their pride is still on the line.
They were not wrong therefore they cannot have been nor be wrong. So the Clintons must be the most brilliant, successful, etc etc and even though Hillary lost to Obama because he was more Historical this lady time it was still her time because for her supporters it was supposed to always be their time.
Your responses are almost always pathetic, but this is a new level even for you.
I quoted his ■■■■■■■ words exactly and you are saying they are different.
That is pathetic Wild Rose. Even for you.
More like Bossling Hogg
Boss Hogg wasn’t a twerp.
Check out his How to Play series about computer gaming. You won’t regret it.
I tend to agree with everything you posed especially about Perot. Bill would have never won without Perot splitting the vote in 92.
Imagine two people on a frictionless railroad car of zero mass. Person A has a handgun that fires a 15 gram bullet at 250 meters per second ( assumed constant along the length of the railroad car). Person B has a rifle that fires a 3.5 gram bullet at 1000 meters per second ( same assumption). Both shooters weigh 100 kg.
At time t=0, they shoot each other standing at opposite ends of the railroad car 16 meters apart. The bullets hit their targets and do not exit the bodies.
Does the frictionless, massless railroad car move?
The frictionless, massless railroad whinges about you using grams when you should have used grains.
2 Likes
No, because, being frictionless, the bodies have nothing to resist both being held to where they’re standing. They just go flying off either end of the frictionless floor. 
2 Likes
I’ll lay it out as simply as possible. Let’s start with common dataset.
Bullet 1
40 grain
Velocity 3000
Bullet 2
230 grain
Velocity 1000
Calc of energy…
15.4 grains to a gram
Jay jays calculation
E1/E2 = 403^2 / (2301^2) = 1.56
Wildrose method using mass in grams and actual velocities
M1 = 40 grains = 40/15.4 = 2.60 grams
M2 = 230 grains = 230/15.4 = 14.94 grams
E1/E2 = 0.52.603000^2 / (0.514.941000^2) = 1.56
Both methods get to the same proportion of 1.56
Good thing or we would need to redefine how we view units.
Wildrose, go ahead and try the calculation to see for yourself. Or if you don’t like the masses and velocities choose other ones and then apply each method. You will get the same 1.56 if your M1/M2 and V1/V2 stay the same as those used above.
Of course, if you mess with those ratios then your number will be different. But then your beef isn’t with the math, it is with the initial assumptions.
Well that worked like crap. Apparently it doesn’t like the asterix symbol. *****
Test 34 43
I think I fixed it…
I’ll lay it out as simply as possible. Let’s start with common dataset.
Bullet 1
40 grain
Velocity 3000
Bullet 2
230 grain
Velocity 1000
Calc of energy…
15.4 grains to a gram
Jay jays calculation
E1/E2 = 40 x 3^2 / (230 x 1^2) = 1.56
Wildrose method using mass in grams and actual velocities
M1 = 40 grains = 40/15.4 = 2.60 grams
M2 = 230 grains = 230/15.4 = 14.94 grams
E1/E2 = 0.5 x 2.60 x 3000^2 / (0.5 x 14.94 x 1000^2) = 1.56
Both methods get to the same proportion of 1.56
Good thing or we would need to redefine how we view units.
Wildrose, go ahead and try the calculation to see for yourself. Or if you don’t like the masses and velocities choose other ones and then apply each method. You will get the same 1.56 if your M1/M2 and V1/V2 ratios stay the same as those used above.
Of course, if you mess with those ratios then your number will be different. But then your beef isn’t with the math, it is with the initial assumptions.
lol - yeah, this board uses the asterix when you bold things or use some of the other functions. I can’t put things between greater than and less than signs either. It just doesn’t show up in post.
Rose is gonna come back and claim your calculations would sink his battleship though. He can’t change his perspective. Like… ever. At least not on the boards.
No…why should they be? They’re measuring different things.
I read you just fine.
I’m not a Marvel fan and I thought Black Panther was fun to watch. A bit too much action for me, though.
