| At 2015-01-21 14:53:45, Io wrote: You corrected the error at the end of the page but the other error still persists: You write, in the middle of the proof: <math>F_x-\frac{V/c^2(F_xv_x+F_yv_y+F_zv_z)}{1-Vv_x/c^2}=F_x-\frac{V/c^2(F_yv_y+F_zv_z)}{1-Vv_x/c^2}</math> The correct statement is: <math>\frac{F_x}{1-Vv_x/c^2}-\frac{V/c^2(F_xv_x+F_yv_y+F_zv_z)}{1-Vv_x/c^2}=F_x-\frac{V/c^2(F_yv_y+F_zv_z)}{1-Vv_x/c^2}</math> |

| At 2014-12-30 18:43:08, Demon Hunter Society wrote: http://allnewspipeline.com/Dem... |

| At 2014-10-16 16:48:32, Andrei Cosma wrote: Looks like you have no interest in correcting your mistakes. |

| At 2014-09-28 15:13:11, Andrei Cosma wrote: There is another mistake, as bad as the one I already flagged. You write, in the middle of the proof: <math>F_x-\frac{V/c^2(F_xv_x+F_yv_y+F_zv_z)}{1-Vv_x/c^2}=F_x-\frac{V/c^2(F_yv_y+F_zv_z)}{1-Vv_x/c^2}</math> The correct statement is: <math>\frac{F_x}{1-Vv_x/c^2}-\frac{V/c^2(F_xv_x+F_yv_y+F_zv_z)}{1-Vv_x/c^2}=F_x-\frac{V/c^2(F_yv_y+F_zv_z)}{1-Vv_x/c^2}</math> |

| At 2014-09-24 16:20:09, Andrei Cosma wrote: OK, Alll good and nice but the last two lines in the chapter of "Relativistic Transformation of Forces" are patently wrong, please delete them as they are embarrassing. You claim that : when [tex]V=0[/tex]...Well , [tex]V[/tex] is the speed of frame S wrt frame S', so what follows in your page is nonsense: [tex]F'_x=F_x[tex] (yes, it is trivial) [tex]F'_y=F_y/\gamma[/tex] (for [tex]V=0[/tex] [tex]\gamma=1[/tex] The origin of your error is your claim that [tex]V[/tex] is the speed of the particle in frame S. It isn't. Please delete the last part of your chapter. Thank you. |

| At 2014-04-06 08:41:55, Frederick Colbourne wrote: I come to your blog via the book The Chilling Stars, which cites your work over and over again as support for Svensmark's work on clouds. I have added your blog to my newsreader which I check every day. By the way, I always check non-scientist / layman when I reply to surveys, even though I have a recent M.S. degree in physical science with emphasis in Earth science. I have read astrophysical papers in journals an have no difficulty following the arguments. However, an astrophysicist would consider me a layman because I don't earn a living in astrophysics. Ditto climatology. So I am thinking that some of the "laymen" in your survey might also work in professions that rely on a science education. Is an engineer a layman? They don't think so. |

| At 2014-02-06 13:49:45, Ajay wrote: Prof. Nir J. Shaviv, is it possible you could contact me on ajayrayit@gmail.com to discuss some of your water rocket simulation ideas as I would like to know how you made the water rocket simulator. Thanks Ajay |

| At 2013-10-16 12:03:06, nirshaviv wrote: It was a typo! should have been encountered... (corrected, thanks) |

| At 2013-10-16 11:59:48, nirshaviv wrote: its a typo! It should be "encountered". thanks for pointing out. it was corrected |

| At 2013-10-16 11:53:43, harkin wrote: Do you mean to say "encounted", which you say above twice? I had never seen that word used and could not find it in the dictionary (nor "encount"). Great site btw. The supernova precursor post is v interesting. |