Cecil Moore wrote:
Jim Higgins wrote:
Cecil seems to be annoyed by the Scientific Method because at some
point there are competing theories and all can't be correct. Of
course! That's how science works!

Jim, I'm annoyed at people who assert that scientific
theories are never wrong and are simply a subset of
something that is more correct.

I'm sure those straw men of yours are shaking in their boots.


--

73 from Ian GM3SEK

Ian White GM3SEK wrote:
I'm sure those straw men of yours are shaking in their boots.

I think if you will check the history of this thread,
someone asserted that scientific theories are very
rarely ever wrong but sometimes have to be boundary
condition limited to become subsets of more accurate
theories.

So I am never wrong - I am just in the process of
defining the boundary conditions for my scientific
theories. :-)
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

On 30 May, 19:13, Tony Jaa wrote:
Water burns!
Man looking for cancer cure hopes to solve energy crisis
Posted: May 30, 2007
5:00 p.m. Eastern

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=55934

By Joe Kovacs
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

Is the solution to America's energy needs as simple as a trip to the beach?
snip

YES
What is so wrong in applying a governer to all engines. These would be
activated
when an engine has come to a stand still and would regulate the
acceleration rate.
This same governer would also activate again to regulate the rate of
accelaration
after 65 mph is reached. Most of the population live in high density
hot spots
using the vehicle to sit in waiting for traffic to move and it is not
economical
to accellerate to the bumper up front. For inner cities enforce use of
public
transportation for those not willing to pay the price to the
companies front door.
As for trucks the interstates are wide enough to introduce rail
traffic as well
as predicting the needs of product movement. A generaqtion later work
will be
done at home in a psuedo office enfironment memoving the need to get
on the
road in the first place. As for the trip to the beach that won't be
necessary as the water will be way to polluted and the sand will be
taken away
to build developments upon, that will decay in unison with the advance
of science.
If we had to, is the above a total impossibility that it is not doable
because
of the power of those who have cornered the money or the naysayers
that serve them?
directional needs

art wrote:
What is so wrong in applying a governer to all engines.

The first time a driver needed to use acceleration
and didn't have it to avoid a fatal accident, the
requirement would be in deep dodo.

For instance, on a long straightaway with no
oncoming traffic, someone decides to pass a
couple of 18-wheelers. The car following that
one decides to do the same thing. Suddenly
ahead, a car pulls into the oncoming lane from
a side road. Emergency acceleration would save
lives but it's not available due to a governor.
Five children are killed. Imagine the outrage.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

On 15 Jun, 11:56, Cecil Moore wrote:
art wrote:
What is so wrong in applying a governer to all engines.

The first time a driver needed to use acceleration
and didn't have it to avoid a fatal accident, the
requirement would be in deep dodo.

For instance, on a long straightaway with no
oncoming traffic, someone decides to pass a
couple of 18-wheelers. The car following that
one decides to do the same thing. Suddenly
ahead, a car pulls into the oncoming lane from
a side road. Emergency acceleration would save
lives but it's not available due to a governor.
Five children are killed. Imagine the outrage.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 12:27:31 -0700, art wrote:

On 15 Jun, 11:56, Cecil Moore wrote:
art wrote:
What is so wrong in applying a governer to all engines.

The first time a driver needed to use acceleration
and didn't have it to avoid a fatal accident, the
requirement would be in deep dodo.

For instance, on a long straightaway with no
oncoming traffic, someone decides to pass a
couple of 18-wheelers. The car following that
one decides to do the same thing. Suddenly
ahead, a car pulls into the oncoming lane from
a side road. Emergency acceleration would save
lives but it's not available due to a governor.
Five children are killed. Imagine the outrage.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com


Hi Arthur,

Your responses are always so insightful.

To add to the confusion, instead of five children killed, the cars are
passing twenty two gas tankers when a school bus pulls out near a
nuclear facility in the outskirts of Keokuk. The conflagration kills
1345 children (there were more busses behind the first, it was the
last day of grade school) and the raging inferno melts down the
transmission lines from the nuclear plant that went into immediate
overload. This caused the nuclear pile to go into the "China
Syndrome" and melt through the containment and disturbing an unknown
fault that ran beneath the plant.

The earth rent and sent shock waves through metropolis Keokuk toppling
buildings and throwing more school busses (on the road from closing
schools) into yawning chasms opening up as the earth quakes. Death
toll at this point now stands at slightly less than a million.

The National Guard (which is otherwise away on other, foreign,
business) does not show up and famine wipes out two million more in
the surrounding country side as the president helicopters over the
scene for Fox news commentary coloring.

The stock market plunges and politicians open committees investigating
the cause of this calamity. Soon, all cars are stopped at every
intersection as the newly instituted Department of School Crossing
Security inspects under the hood of every car for contraband
governers. Digital examinations up tail pipes are common. The
designer of this governer product is known to be hiding somewhere in
Texas so we immediately declare war on Canada with a scorch the earth
policy (brought to you by Halliburton and Anderson Consulting firms)
until he is found.

Four years later and the ice cap has been melted putting out the fires
in downtown Keokuk (Chicago, Boston, New York, Tampa, Phoenix....) and
the president expresses his support for the governer designer and
hails this crowning victory from the Hacienda Blanca.

With apologies for lifting a very old idea from an equally old book By
Sinclair Lewis "It Can't Happen Here."

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On 15 Jun, 11:56, Cecil Moore wrote:
art wrote:
What is so wrong in applying a governer to all engines.

The first time a driver needed to use acceleration
and didn't have it to avoid a fatal accident, the
requirement would be in deep dodo.
O.K. so you want to be a naysayer. Assuming you
are willing to accept change and adaptation
that change requires let as look at the actual words
without playing word games to gain a gottcha.
For instance, on a long straightaway with no
oncoming traffic, Ok so we say that people
are going the speed limit since speeding is
prohibitive. No don't play word games



someone decides to pass a
couple of 18-wheelers. So he accelerates
to pass or if it cannot be done without
breaking the speed limits he doesn't do it
tho he could overtake over a period in time
since the governer only regulates not stop.


The car following that
one decides to do the same thing.
Thats O.K. he now has more time to decide
on his options.

Suddenly

No there is no "suddenly" his vehicle will
not allow him to do that tho it will allow
him to ease into the traffic flow where others
could accommodate his actions.

ahead, a car pulls into the oncoming lane from
a side road.
No a car doesn't pull into fast moving traffic
knowing the engine will not respond in such a
dangerous manner. However other cars do not
have a governor to prevent braking while the
other car is moving slowly from a distance


Emergency acceleration would save
lives


Emergency acceleration is still available over 30 miles an hour
and under 65 miles an hour. Most accidents occur at un expected
changes in direction and judgement and in dense areas thus
giving more time for alternate action including brakes.

but it's not available due to a governor.
he has time, a steering wheel and brakes.

Five children are killed. Imagine the outrage.

Deaths occur at high speeds in general or non use of seat belts
Studies have shown that setting speed limits and the use of
seat belts saves lives and remember when the work day starts
congestion rules for the majority.

--
Don't you think you can adapt quickly in dense traffic
even if the motor cycle you ride allows you to ride with
impudence? Remember the intent is to reduce the use of gasolene
for the Nation not to prevent people to take advantage
of others on the road without looking back at the mayhem
caused to others or are you wearing a straw hat again.
Surely you are not promoting the burning of water as
a more logical way to go while the oil supply burns
in anticipation of success.

73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:

Ian White GM3SEK wrote:

I'm sure those straw men of yours are shaking in their boots.


I think if you will check the history of this thread,
someone asserted that scientific theories are very
rarely ever wrong but sometimes have to be boundary
condition limited to become subsets of more accurate
theories.

Sounds like someone might have been talking about the theories
ordinarily referred to as Newtonian Mechanics and Quantum Mechanics.

73, ac6xg

Jim Higgins wrote:
And you can name those people ... and refer to a message where
this can be verified?

Don't want to name names but here is the assertion with
which I have been disagreeing:

"Hypotheses are discarded all the time, theories aren't."
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Jim Kelley wrote:
Sounds like someone might have been talking about the theories
ordinarily referred to as Newtonian Mechanics and Quantum Mechanics.

No, he appeared to be referring to all theories:

"Hypotheses are discarded all the time, theories aren't."
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com