Originally posted by Nibedicus
h1 doesn't notice that ppl have provided credible sources that debunk his logic.h1 is now in full denial mode.
h1 is still dodging the BZ challenge.
sad.
Look up the values yourself. Plug them in. See what you get.
No one debunked my logic. I used the same formula as everyone.
You get the close to 1/5 if you use 100,000k or a neutron's star temperature.
But neutron star's temperature can also be 600,000k.
Originally posted by The Spectre+
wow!!!! so this is still going on
h1 still criticized for math
quan still trolling
nine still arguing
I must have missed quite a lot of pages
Not in this case. They know my math is correct, so refuse to attack it directly.
Its just a simple formula that takes literally 10 seconds to plug into.
It's like arguing with someone who refuse to be wrong. They result to lying.
Originally posted by h1a8
So you result to trolling?
You won't do your own plugging in and verify for yourself. Pretend we are all wrong.Look up the values yourself. Plug them in. See what you get.
No one debunked my logic. I used the same formula as everyone.
You get the close to 1/5 if you use 100,000k or a neutron's star temperature.
But neutron star's temperature can also be 600,000k.
>Ignores the fact that credible credentialed sources has debunked his numbers.
>Insists he's right.
>Accuses others of trolling.
#h1logic!
😱
Originally posted by h1a8
Not in this case. They know my math is correct, so refuse to attack it directly.
Its just a simple formula that takes literally 10 seconds to plug into.It's like arguing with someone who refuse to be wrong. They result to lying.
>Lies.
>Accuses people of lying.
>Refuses to admit he is wrong.
>Accuses people of refusing to be wrong.
#h1logic!
😱
PS. Still waiting on the BZ acceptance.
Originally posted by The Spectre+
wow!!!! so this is still going on
h1 still criticized for math
quan still trolling
nine still arguing
I must have missed quite a lot of pages
Lemme break down what just happened so that h1 won't pull a fast one on you (since you've missed quite a bit). Starts at page 8 of this thread.
h1 is trying to divert ppl's attention to the fact that his argument that he wouldn't accept the math/science behind this video (because science youtube video):
Due to the fact that h1 claims that:
Originally posted by h1a8
He made several errors
He was then debunked by an the numbers of an actual Astronomy Harvard PHD, Jonathan Devor via his math here:
https://www.quora.com/In-which-region-of-an-H-R-diagram-do-neutron-stars-fall
Proving that the "Because Science" guy's science/math are actually correct (the slight value difference may be from sampling differences between the two on what constitutes an "average"😉 and that his refusal to accept the science behind it invalid.
He is now (lying little weasel that he is) trying to force the debate into double checking his now irrelevant math for accuracy to waste our time or (if we refuse to waste our time) so that he can claim that we are being dishonest.
Which is all just another distraction (of course) since he just does not want to accept the BZ I issued him weeks ago.
Somehow h1 thinks we won't notice his little lying weasel ways like we have goldfish-level short memories (yes, I KNOW that's a myth) or something.
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Lemme break down what just happened so that h1 won't pull a fast one on you (since you've missed quite a bit). Starts at page 8 of this thread.h1 is trying to divert ppl's attention to the fact that his argument that he wouldn't accept the math/science behind this video (because science youtube video):
Due to the fact that h1 claims that:
He was then debunked by an the numbers of an actual Astronomy Harvard PHD, Jonathan Devor via his math here:
https://www.quora.com/In-which-region-of-an-H-R-diagram-do-neutron-stars-fall
Proving that the "Because Science" guy's science/math are actually correct (the slight value difference may be from sampling differences between the two on what constitutes an "average"😉 and that his refusal to accept the science behind it invalid.
He is now (lying little weasel that he is) trying to force the debate into double checking his now irrelevant math for accuracy to waste our time or (if we refuse to waste our time) so that he can claim that we are being dishonest.
Which is all just another distraction (of course) since he just does not want to accept the BZ I issued him weeks ago.
Somehow h1 thinks we won't notice his little lying weasel ways like we have goldfish-level short memories (yes, I KNOW that's a myth) or something.
Here it is again.
Power = 4πr^2*σ*T^4
A neutron star's radius is 10km (used by both sources)
The temperature of a neutron star ranges depending on several factors (such as age). Both 600,000k and 1,000,000k are within the range.
I used 600,000k (from the source I posted) whereas science guy uses 1,000,000k.
Plugging in these values give Power = 1.629e32*σ
The sun's radius is 6.957e8 m and the surface temperature of the Sun is 5778k.
Plugging in these values gives Power = 6.779e33*σ
Dividing the first result by the second result gives
The power output of a neutron star is 0.024 times that of the Sun.
Now if we assume that a neutron's star temperature is 1,000,000k (not 600,000k) then the result is 0.185 times that of the Sun (which matches Nibedicus source and is close to the Science guy estimate).
I explained this already. The difference is in the temperature used for a neutron star.
When quantifying feats, WE MUST use the LOWEST POSSIBLE estimates so that we can get a MINIMUM for the feat. I used 600,000k because that is a lower estimate from a source I posted and the fact that the star is very old (it forged Mjolnir before Thor was born).
Originally posted by h1a8
Here it is again.Power = 4πr^2*σ*T^4
A neutron star's radius is 10km (used by both sources)
The temperature of a neutron star ranges depending on several factors (such as age). Both 600,000k and 1,000,000k are within the range.
I used 600,000k (from the source I posted) whereas science guy uses 1,000,000k.Plugging in these values give Power = 1.629e32*σ
The sun's radius is 6.957e8 m and the surface temperature of the Sun is 5778k.
Plugging in these values gives Power = 6.779e33*σ
Dividing the first result by the second result gives
The power output of a neutron star is 0.024 times that of the Sun.Now if we assume that a neutron's star temperature is 1,000,000k (not 600,000k) then the result is 0.185 times that of the Sun (which matches Nibedicus source and is close to the Science guy estimate).
I explained this already. The difference is in the temperature used for a neutron star.
When quantifying feats, WE MUST use the LOWEST POSSIBLE estimates so that we can get a MINIMUM for the feat. I used 600,000k because that is a lower estimate from a source I posted and the fact that the star is very old (it forged Mjolnir before Thor was born).
See? This is why people don't believe you. You lie a lot. I mean A LOT. It's like everything that comes out of your mouth is a lie.
The reason for your post was to disprove the Science guy's logic. Here is the exchange between you and SM, it is literally a few pages ago.
Originally posted by h1a8
1) Thor didn't experience 2x10^20J of heat energy
At which point, SM posted the Because Science video.
Then the exchange continued:
Originally posted by Silent Master
You'll notice that at no time during h1's post did he actually refute the videos numbers.
Originally posted by h1a8
He made several errors
Notice I underlined "errors"? You claimed he was wrong. Due to errors.
I then proved your claim wrong via the math of a Harvard Astronomy PHD whose link I provided.
You weren't trying to establish the lower limits of the "feat", you were claiming he was wrong due to errors.
Stop. Freaking. Lying.
Originally posted by h1a8
So you result to trolling?
You won't do your own plugging in and verify for yourself. Pretend we are all wrong.Look up the values yourself. Plug them in. See what you get.
No one debunked my logic. I used the same formula as everyone.
You get the close to 1/5 if you use 100,000k or a neutron's star temperature.
But neutron star's temperature can also be 600,000k.
For ****'s Sake H1!!!!
Just accept the Battlezone once and for all and get done with this folly!
If you believe your calc's are so 'VALID' then you shouldn't have a problem in the BZ! What are you scared of!?
Originally posted by Nibedicus
See? This is why people don't believe you. You lie a lot. I mean A LOT. It's like everything that comes out of your mouth is a lie.The reason for your post was to disprove the Science guy's logic. Here is the exchange between you and SM, it is literally a few pages ago.
At which point, SM posted the Because Science video.
Then the exchange continued:
Notice I underlined "errors"? You claimed he was wrong. Due to errors.
I then proved your claim wrong via the math of a Harvard Astronomy PHD whose link I provided.
You weren't trying to establish the lower limits of the "feat", you were claiming he was wrong due to errors.
Stop. Freaking. Lying.
1/4 and less than 1/5 is a huge difference astronomically. Therefore it is an error. There is no way in hell you can get 1/4 with the numbers he posted. It's just plain wrong. The result should be LESS than (but close to) 1/5th based off the numbers he gave. He should have stated 0.20Lo (not 0.25Lo).
And stop ignoring the fact that I already said that his 1,000,000k gives an answer close to his 1/4th. I already mentioned it. There was absolutely no deception on my part. You never read my posts in completion.
Then you would rather take someone else's word when you can do it yourself. We all make mistakes (even Harvard Graduates). You basically trolling for pages. All you needed to do was check yourself and be objective.
Originally posted by h1a8
So you result to trolling?
You won't do your own plugging in and verify for yourself. Pretend we are all wrong.Look up the values yourself. Plug them in. See what you get.
No one debunked my logic. I used the same formula as everyone.
You get the close to 1/5 if you use 1,000,000k for a neutron's star temperature.
But neutron star's temperature can also be 600,000k.
This is what I posted already.
Originally posted by h1a8
This is what I posted already.
Yet Nibe hasn't conceded his points. And this debate is going nowhere 'cause
1. You are bringing calculations no one trusts
2. You are denying calculations many agree with...You are being stubborn and keep bringing unfounded calculations.
This should be taken to a BZ where judges can end up the dilema. Why are you afraid if you trust your cals so much!?
Originally posted by FrothByte
Is there even a single person here that takes H1's calculations seriously?
There is...Have you been paying attention to this debate mr. Froth!!....Clearly there is a person who supports H1's claims here and that is h1a8 above.....
Please pay more attention next time Froth 😂