SMOT! - (previously about the OC MPMM)

[tinu]

Correct. Despite the fact that in both cases that follow the hand lifts the ball from A to B we have:


1) CoE violated:

Ea(final) = (mgh1 + mgh1 + Kc) = (Ma + other energies)

This is observed in the discussed case.



2) CoE obeyed:

Ea(final) = (mgh1 + Mb) ? (mgh1 ? (Ma ? Mb)) = Ma

This is not observed in the discussed case.

I disagree.
It is precisely THE OTHER WAY:

1) CoE OBEYED:

Ea(final) = (mgh1 + mgh2 + Kc) = (Ma + other energies)

Where ?other energies?=Ehand.

This is observed in the discussed case.


2) CoE VIOLATED:

Ea(final) = (mgh1 + Mb) ? (mgh1 ? (Ma ? Mb)) = Ma

This is not observed in the discussed case.
Of course it is not observed because, despite all the loses, Ehand does not 'vanish in aether' and part of it manifests as Ka, according to CoE obeyed above.

Tinu

[Omnibus]

@tinu,

You want to be funny, don't you? You forget, however, that physics isn't a comedy show.

[tinu]

@omnibus,

No, I'm not joking; this time I am very serious.
And the case above - CoE obeyed (point 1) plus all the posts from former dialogue show quite a good picture of SMOT. Equations conform to physical reality.
Why do you ask if I?m joking? Is it something you disagree?

Tinu

[Omnibus]

@omnibus,

No, I'm not joking; this time I am very serious.
And the case above - CoE obeyed (point 1) plus all the posts from former dialogue show quite a good picture of SMOT. Equations conform to physical reality.
Why do you ask if I?m joking? Is it something you disagree?

Tinu

Don't even bother continuing this. This is a serious discussion, not a joke you're trying to turn it into.

[tinu]

@omnibus,

Oh, but it was not that serious after all?
It took a week to find out that Ein is correctly defined but Eout is not. I don?t see how CoE can be properly discussed if only half of its equation (CoE: Eout=Ein) is correctly handled.

So far everybody agreed that Ein=mgh1+Mb-Ma
But there is a slight unsolved issue since you mistakenly said that
?Eout(CoE violated) = (mgh1 + Mb) = (mgh1 + mgh2 + Kc)?. That is Etotal, not Eout.

Hopefully, during the next week we can agree upon Eout and Etotal and continue with a serious discussion. Until then, have a nice week everyone.

Tinu