On May 23, 8:31 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > On May 22, 7:52 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On May 22, 4:23 pm, palsing <pnals...@gmail.com> wrote: > > [...] > > > > If your New Science is on the same plane as your linguistic skills, > > > where we find you being stubborn about something you obviously know > > > nothing about, I suspect that if I look up "intellectual lightweight" > > > in the dictionary I might find your picture there. You just don't know > > > what you don't know. > > > > \Paul A > > > Ask him how he thinks he's disproved the classical formulation of > > kinetic energy by dropping ball bearings into clay. > > Eric: Why don't YOU explain how your air-hockey game can measure KE > at all. Ha, ha, HA! ? NE ?
If it is an inclined table, you can use the work-energy theorem. If it is a flat table, you scatter spheres and whatnot off eachother then you find the resultant angles and energies.
You can also use ballistic pendulums, or pull a Joule and measure the temperature increase of water as you deposit energy into the water.
I've given you the links that show exactly how to perform the experiments but you just don't seem as interested as you are in arguing about nuances of English.
