On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 12:38:10 PM UTC-6, Dono. wrote:

On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 10:25:54 AM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:

On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 6:32:19 PM UTC-6, Dono. wrote:

On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 2:34:35 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:

It has nothing to do with DOI: 10.13189/ujpa.2023.170101 or anything discussed here.
Tsk, tsk! Dono still doesn't get it. He rejects the application of calculus in both places
because he doesn't understand the very basis of calculus. That makes HIM the crank,
which is the way he's been behaving.

Actually, it does, hardened crank, it shows hoe p'=mu'/sqrt(u'^2/c^2-1) changes sign.

Which is exactly what I've been saying:

p' = \gamma m(u -v)sqrt[(1 - uv/c^2)^2]/[(1 - uv/c^2)sqrt(u^2/c^2 - 1)] ... EQ. (1)

The sqrt[(1 - uv/c^2)^2] in the numerator does NOT become negative for u > c^2/v because
of PEMDAS, thus the (1 - uv/c^2) term in the denominator reverses the sign of p'.

WolframAlpha is proving that you do not know how to apply "PEDMAS".

Actually, WolframAlpha has become the gold standard because they follow my lead :-)

This explains why you got only a C in calculus.

ADVANCED calculus. Why can't Dono ever tell the whole truth?

Here is another example how WolframAlpha proves you to be an idiot:

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=%28x-.3%29%2F%281-.3x%29%2Fsqrt%28%28x-.3%29%5E2%2F%281-.3x%29%5E2-1%29

See the negative branch of the graph?

Dono doesn't seem to be able to remain on one composition long enough
to fully understand it. Let's go back to

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=%28x-3%29%2F%281-3x%29%2Fsqrt%28%28x-3%29%5E2%2F%281-3x%29%5E2-1%29

f(x) = (x - 3)/{(1 - 3x)sqrt[(x - 3)^2/(1 - 3x)^2 - 1]}
f(x) = (x - 3)/{(1 - 3x)sqrt[(x^2 - 6x + 9 - 1 + 6x - 9x^2)/(1 - 3x)^2]}
f(x) = (x - 3)/{(1 - 3x)sqrt[(8 - 8x^2)/(1 - 3x)^2]}
and we slip that ol' sqrt[(1 - 3x)^2] up into the numerator:
f(x) = (x - 3)sqrt[(1 - 3x)^2]/[(1 - 3x)sqrt[(8 - 8x^2)]
and it plots like WolframAlpha the gold standard shows. If we ignore
PEMDAS and insist that sqrt[(1 - 3x)^2] = 1 - 3x, then all the points are plotted in the lower half of the graph. PEMDAS is the gold standard.

I don't think Dono's leap to his alternate composition offers anything new
and I have better things to do than chasing unicorns.

Actually, it shows that the "WolframAlpha gold standard" follows PEMDAS, whereas the 4MF fails to do so.

There is no "PEDMAS" in the 4-momentum DEFINITION.

Dono is still camped on that dead horse. The 4M definition is P =[E/c, p].
P' = [E'/c, p'] is also a definition. P' = \eta P, is not a definition, or, if it is
asserted to be such, it's incorrect for u > c^2/v and must be rejected and replaced by what is derived from more basic principles. To keep riding the dead horse would be to set oneself up as a judge of mathematical Truth
and Knowledge.

“Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge
is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods.” -- Albert Einstein

“Talk no more so exceeding proudly; let not arrogancy come out of your mouth” – 1 Samuel 2:3

“A fool is someone whose arrogance is only surpassed by his ignorance.” ― Orrin Woodward

And the horse would still be dead. Dono is choking on gnats and swallowing horses because DOI: 10.13189/ujpa.2023.170101 rejects the ability to directly receive a signal traveling at u > c^2/v, so however the anomaly at u = c^2/v is addressed, it's moot and a diversion, and I need to do research on my next paper.
It's beginning to come together :-)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 3:08:15 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:

On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 12:38:10 PM UTC-6, Dono. wrote:

On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 10:25:54 AM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:

On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 6:32:19 PM UTC-6, Dono. wrote:

On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 2:34:35 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:

It has nothing to do with DOI: 10.13189/ujpa.2023.170101 or anything discussed here.
Tsk, tsk! Dono still doesn't get it. He rejects the application of calculus in both places
because he doesn't understand the very basis of calculus. That makes HIM the crank,
which is the way he's been behaving.

Actually, it does, hardened crank, it shows hoe p'=mu'/sqrt(u'^2/c^2-1) changes sign.

Which is exactly what I've been saying:

p' = \gamma m(u -v)sqrt[(1 - uv/c^2)^2]/[(1 - uv/c^2)sqrt(u^2/c^2 - 1)] ... EQ. (1)

The sqrt[(1 - uv/c^2)^2] in the numerator does NOT become negative for u > c^2/v because
of PEMDAS, thus the (1 - uv/c^2) term in the denominator reverses the sign of p'.

WolframAlpha is proving that you do not know how to apply "PEDMAS".

Actually, WolframAlpha has become the gold standard because they follow my lead :-)

This explains why you got only a C in calculus.

ADVANCED calculus. Why can't Dono ever tell the whole truth?

Here is another example how WolframAlpha proves you to be an idiot:

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=%28x-.3%29%2F%281-.3x%29%2Fsqrt%28%28x-.3%29%5E2%2F%281-.3x%29%5E2-1%29

See the negative branch of the graph?

Dono doesn't seem to be able to remain on one composition long enough
to fully understand it. Let's go back to

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=%28x-3%29%2F%281-3x%29%2Fsqrt%28%28x-3%29%5E2%2F%281-3x%29%5E2-1%29

f(x) = (x - 3)/{(1 - 3x)sqrt[(x - 3)^2/(1 - 3x)^2 - 1]}
f(x) = (x - 3)/{(1 - 3x)sqrt[(x^2 - 6x + 9 - 1 + 6x - 9x^2)/(1 - 3x)^2]} f(x) = (x - 3)/{(1 - 3x)sqrt[(8 - 8x^2)/(1 - 3x)^2]}
and we slip that ol' sqrt[(1 - 3x)^2] up into the numerator:
f(x) = (x - 3)sqrt[(1 - 3x)^2]/[(1 - 3x)sqrt[(8 - 8x^2)]
and it plots like WolframAlpha the gold standard shows. If we ignore
PEMDAS and insist that sqrt[(1 - 3x)^2] = 1 - 3x, then all the points are plotted in the lower half of the graph. PEMDAS is the gold standard.

I don't think Dono's leap to his alternate composition offers anything new and I have better things to do than chasing unicorns.

Actually, it shows that the "WolframAlpha gold standard" follows PEMDAS, whereas the 4MF fails to do so.

There is no "PEDMAS" in the 4-momentum DEFINITION.

Dono is still camped on that dead horse. The 4M definition is P =[E/c, p]. P' = [E'/c, p'] is also a definition. P' = \eta P, is not a definition, or, if it is
asserted to be such, it's incorrect for u > c^2/v and must be rejected and replaced by what is derived from more basic principles. To keep riding the dead horse would be to set oneself up as a judge of mathematical Truth
and Knowledge.
“Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge
is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods.” -- Albert Einstein
“Talk no more so exceeding proudly; let not arrogancy come out of your mouth” – 1 Samuel 2:3

“A fool is someone whose arrogance is only surpassed by his ignorance.” ― Orrin Woodward

And the horse would still be dead. Dono is choking on gnats and swallowing horses because DOI: 10.13189/ujpa.2023.170101 rejects the ability to directly
receive a signal traveling at u > c^2/v, so however the anomaly at u = c^2/v is
addressed, it's moot and a diversion, and I need to do research on my next paper.
It's beginning to come together :-)

You said neutrinos are your answer gary?
what is your proof...?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 3:08:15 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:

On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 12:38:10 PM UTC-6, Dono. wrote:

WolframAlpha is proving that you do not know how to apply "PEDMAS".

Actually, WolframAlpha has become the gold standard because they follow my lead :-)

Nurse,

Insane asylum patient Gary Harnagel is having hallucinations again. Must give him the anti-psychotic drugs.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 3:08:15 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:

On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 12:38:10 PM UTC-6, Dono. wrote:

This explains why you got only a C in calculus.

ADVANCED calculus.

Doesn't matter, you are an idiot either way, as evidenced by the errors that you post.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 3:08:15 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:

On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 12:38:10 PM UTC-6, Dono. wrote:

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=%28x-.3%29%2F%281-.3x%29%2Fsqrt%28%28x-.3%29%5E2%2F%281-.3x%29%5E2-1%29

See the negative branch of the graph?

Dono doesn't seem to be able to remain on one composition long enough

The second example illustrates your imbecility in an (even) stronger way. So, do you see the negative branch of the graph, hardened crank? Still no? Everyone else does.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 3:08:15 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:
The 4M definition is P =[E/c, p].


You have been given the correct definition , from the hyperphysics page multiple times. You should stop lying.

P' = [E'/c, p'] is also a definition. P' = \eta P, is not a definition, or, if it is
asserted to be such, it's incorrect for u > c^2/v and must be rejected and replaced by what is derived from more basic principles.

You are such a pathetic imbecile, Gary. You should be ashamed of yourself, at 81 and lying thru your teeth.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 3:08:15 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:

Let's go back to

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=%28x-3%29%2F%281-3x%29%2Fsqrt%28%28x-3%29%5E2%2F%281-3x%29%5E2-1%29

f(x) = (x - 3)/{(1 - 3x)sqrt[(x - 3)^2/(1 - 3x)^2 - 1]}
f(x) = (x - 3)/{(1 - 3x)sqrt[(x^2 - 6x + 9 - 1 + 6x - 9x^2)/(1 - 3x)^2]} f(x) = (x - 3)/{(1 - 3x)sqrt[(8 - 8x^2)/(1 - 3x)^2]}
and we slip that ol' sqrt[(1 - 3x)^2] up into the numerator:
f(x) = (x - 3)sqrt[(1 - 3x)^2]/[(1 - 3x)sqrt[(8 - 8x^2)]

Bzzt, this is exactly the step where you fuck up, ignoramus.

and it plots like WolframAlpha the gold standard shows. If we ignore
PEMDAS and insist that sqrt[(1 - 3x)^2] = 1 - 3x, then all the points are plotted in the lower half of the graph. PEMDAS is the gold standard.

Bzzt, this is exactly why you got a "C" in calculus. Your only consolation is that you are as stupid now as you were when you were in college, a C-level student. You have added dishonesty to your native imbecility.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 5:08:40 PM UTC-6, Dono. dissembled:

On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 3:08:15 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:

Let's go back to

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=%28x-3%29%2F%281-3x%29%2Fsqrt%28%28x-3%29%5E2%2F%281-3x%29%5E2-1%29

f(x) = (x - 3)/{(1 - 3x)sqrt[(x - 3)^2/(1 - 3x)^2 - 1]}
f(x) = (x - 3)/{(1 - 3x)sqrt[(x^2 - 6x + 9 - 1 + 6x - 9x^2)/(1 - 3x)^2]} f(x) = (x - 3)/{(1 - 3x)sqrt[(8 - 8x^2)/(1 - 3x)^2]}
and we slip that ol' sqrt[(1 - 3x)^2] up into the numerator:
f(x) = (x - 3)sqrt[(1 - 3x)^2]/[(1 - 3x)sqrt[(8 - 8x^2)]

Bzzt, this is exactly the step where you fuck up, ignoramus.

Desperate dissembling DON'tknOw defines himself as a mathematician,
just like Lea Thompson define HIMSELF as a woman. Both of them are fundamentally dishonest.

and it plots like WolframAlpha the gold standard shows. If we ignore PEMDAS and insist that sqrt[(1 - 3x)^2] = 1 - 3x, then all the points are plotted in the lower half of the graph. PEMDAS is the gold standard.

Bzzt, this is exactly why you got a "C" in calculus.

Dono can't even set up the problem in excel and find out what happens
when that error is made. He doesn't understand mathematical derivation, either, so he just yammers lies. Proof that Dumbo is fundamentally
dishonest:

Your only consolation is that you are as stupid now as you were when you
were in college, a C-level student.

He has just lost a mention in my next paper. There goes his last possible chance for immortality :-))

You have added dishonesty to your native imbecility.

DishONestOne is projecting again. Too bad he doesn't retake remedial
math so he can recover his lost credibility.

"He is not only dull himself; he is the cause of dullness in others."
-- Samuel Johnson

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)