B2L2 寫:Funny why you are so proud of yourself and claimed the leader of gappers' leader pride about your skiing. I remember you call him a true master that time.
He is a true master “skier” alright, but not a master “physicist.”
小女孩真的要多讀書學好英語，人家說 "mobile" 你就説成 "stationary"，真怪。
Yes, all the video and graphs you show, CG are shown “stationary.”
you should learn how to read and get the proper meaning on what you read, whinning little girl.
重點又不是討論CG是否move，係可否離身嗎，跟著又是不知所為 post 個 wrong clip 就又算了。來來去去，左右逃跑。
The clip is correctly shown that “a body always fall with its CG,”and it is not because you little knowledge’s denial it becomes ‘wrong.”“來來去去，左右逃跑” is you Whistler Group’s specialty, and all my questions to you gappers still remain open.
你話BB的 physics 太差，那他們的 physics 又可不可以？好可能想當年，你的 professor 都是用他們的書來教你
----------------
"The centre of mass of an object need not lie within the object.There is no dough at the centre of mass of a doughnut,and no iron at the centre of mass of a horseshoe."
Source(s): Fundamentals Of Physics - David Halliday,Robert Resnick,Jearl Walker.
Not really, the book’s narrow interpretation does not shed the “whole” truth about CG. From BB’s statement (close enough fact),“[CG] this is the point at which all the mass of an object or system of objects acts as if it were concentrated,” as CG is only about a “point” inside the object where the “average” mass of the object is “considered” as concentrated, but did not require there’s mass at that point. The center of a doughnut “hole” or the horseshoe center is all a part and inside of the object with an “average” mass, need not have to have the substance of the mass. The theory is still valid.
#303 回覆: 太極荒島
發表於 : 週日 2月 14, 2016 4:44 am
由 beg
snowbender 寫:When you complained about that I ruined your powder, yes, you were whining.
you should learn how to read and get the proper meaning on what you read, whinning little girl.
The clip is correctly shown that “a body always fall with its CG,”and it is not because you little knowledge’s denial it becomes ‘wrong.”“來來去去，左右逃跑” is you Whistler Group’s specialty, and all my questions to you gappers still remain open.
Not really, the book’s narrow interpretation does not shed the “whole” truth about CG. From BB’s statement (close enough fact),“[CG] this is the point at which all the mass of an object or system of objects acts as if it were concentrated,” as CG is only about a “point” inside the object where the “average” mass of the object is “considered” as concentrated, but did not require there’s mass at that point. The center of a doughnut “hole” or the horseshoe center is all a part and inside of the object with an “average” mass, need not have to have the substance of the mass. The theory is still valid.
既然你不認同 Encyclopedia of skiing 同 Fundamentals Of Physics 兩書所說的，那你拿出支持你的 theory 有關的學術資料，我們再談吧。
你可以喜歡自己話自己正確，在你沒証明之前，我是不會浪費我的精力再回言的，我只可繼續說你的是錯的。
#307 回覆: 回复: 回覆: 回复: 回覆: 太極荒島
發表於 : 週六 2月 20, 2016 10:54 pm
由 snowbender
B2L2 寫:既然你不認同 Encyclopedia of skiing 同 Fundamentals Of Physics 兩書所說的，那你拿出支持你的 theory 有關的學術資料，我們再談吧。
是說過你沒有足夠的物理和數學的訓練，你那“東抄抄西抄抄”的“Encyclopedia of skiing 同 Fundamentals Of Physics”是不能解決你的無知的，你想知道，試試大學成度的calculus和physics，等你過了以後“我們再談吧”‧
你可以喜歡自己話自己正確，在你沒証明之前，我是不會浪費我的精力再回言的，我只可繼續說你的是錯的。
你可以繼續作你的小知，那是你的專權。
#308 回覆: 回复: 回覆: 回复: 回覆: 太極荒島
發表於 : 週日 2月 21, 2016 11:27 am
由 pku
snowbender 寫:是說過你沒有足夠的物理和數學的訓練，你那“東抄抄西抄抄”的“Encyclopedia of skiing 同 Fundamentals Of Physics”是不能解決你的無知的，你想知道，試試大學成度的calculus和physics，等你過了以後“我們再談吧”‧
你可以繼續作你的小知，那是你的專權。
Brian 是香港大學 University of Hong Kong 的 Bachelor of Science
香港大學世界排名五十名內
而你是躱在狐狸洞的小知老人
#309 回覆: 回复: 回覆: 回复: 回覆: 太極荒島
發表於 : 週日 2月 21, 2016 1:26 pm
由 B2L2
snowbender 寫:是說過你沒有足夠的物理和數學的訓練，你那“東抄抄西抄抄”的“Encyclopedia of skiing 同 Fundamentals Of Physics”是不能解決你的無知的，你想知道，試試大學成度的calculus和physics，等你過了以後“我們再談吧”‧
