Nav wrote:
You know, I've had more intelligent conversations than this with 3 year
old.

I'm not so sure. Maybe a 4 year old, but you seem to be a bit above the
3 year old level. Except when you have these tantrums.


Considering that you haven't a clue how to resolve forces on a
free-body diagram

Nav wrote:
... Since you
claim it, show us why my answer is not in the "right ballpark".

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...oogle%2BSearch

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e....nz%26rnum%3D1


... After
all, if you can't show why my answer is wrong it's pretty clear you are
just a silly little man naysaying to try to inflate his importance.

Well, you did not know how to state the problem correctly. You did not
once say that the tension on the topping lift would be greater than the
weight suspended from the boom end. Your figure for compression on the
boom was wrong, as should have been obvious by inspection. You did not
mention any force couple on the mast until after I had explained it to you.

Instead you keep insisting that I must be wrong. Well, maybe, but you
can't seem to prove it by any accepted standard.


Times up Doug, put up or shut up.

Your own words in the above linked threads prove everything I said
above, Navsprit. It is unpleasant to admit when you're wrong. I don't
like it myself, but then it's much more rare for me.


Now, when are you going to discuss the details of the ship propulsion
plant you know so much about, the one that the engine is stopped "by
opening a bypass valve"? When are you going to show us how figure out
prop slip? How about discussing schooner rig terminolgy? When are you
going to explain your specialized theory of tidal gravity wherein two
masses exert a single gravitational force? Should be a Nobel Prize in
that one!

DSK