Answers to questions on other threds that are now locked.

[Patrick Degan]

I am most willing to host these pictures. Stewart, you can email me the pictures and I'll put them up for all to see.

You know, if you keep making these challenges he'll have no choice but to learn how to use Photoshop.

He may end up accidentally electrocuting himself the first time he tries it.

[2000AD]

I am most willing to host these pictures. Stewart, you can email me the pictures and I'll put them up for all to see.

You know, if you keep making these challenges he'll have no choice but to learn how to use Photoshop.

Thing is i've already PM'ed him about how to get pics on the net (find a free host, use [img] tags, etc.) so ow he has a scanner (2 in fact) he's got no excuse.

[The Dude]

Although, it is quite old to keep attacking something so stupid, espeically when you know the person is wrong, and when you know you don't like the person. Why don't you just ban him or get on with something else?

Can the fucking sanctimony, junior. No one is forcing you to read any thread that offends your delicate sensibilities.

Few of you can spell correctly, and even fewer can construct perfectly chosen gramatical sentences (neither can I), but it's pointless to attack that.

If that was the only thing anyone attacked, you might have a point. Regardless, his English is truly atrocious - comparing his mangled English to the minor typos or grammar snafus of others is a joke.

You should, for example, have written, "Can't parse English, Can't differentiate between atmosphere and interplanetary space, and can't operate an idiot-proof device...blah blah blah. That would make for better sentence parallellism.

You should have replaced "should" with "could"; the sentence, as written, is prefectly fine (and includes neither unnecessary repetition nor capitalization). In other words, if you're going to be a nitpicking little fuck, at least get your facts straight.

But who cares? If the point is wrong, and you know his point is wrong, it is just simple-minded to keep pounding on something you OBVIOUSLY know won't have the slightest effect.

Perhaps you couldn't see the "mockery of stupid people" part of the site logo from on top of your high horse?

[Stewart at SDI]

Or indeed, spell Tae Kwon Do right, which, if you took any serious martial arts at a recognisable level, you would have a World Tae Kwon Do Federation license (or other license), which would at least demonstrate how to spell it properly.

It's from faulty memory of 1968. The class was in the sand behind the opps building, not a dojo and I knew how to spell it at least at one time, but screwed the pooch any way.

[Master of Ossus]

It's from faulty memory of 1968. The class was in the sand behind the opps building, not a dojo and I knew how to spell it at least at one time, but screwed the pooch any way.

[Darth Vader]You should not have come back.[/Darth Vader]

So, now that you're back, are you going to send us scans of your various degrees and documentation to back up your claims?

[Stewart at SDI]

Two responses from Stewart and no answer to my challenge. Wow what a fucking surprise.

Hey Stewart,

I fucking DARE you to answer my challenge. If you do not then everyone will have definitive proof of your cowardice (not that they didn't know this anyways).

What chalenge? there are so many things going on here that I don't have a clue what you are talking about.

[General Zod]

in big letters just for stewie.

Fine Stewart, you want to prove yourself to someone? Here's a challange for you. Use your brand new scanner (either one is fine) and scan the following documents:

Your University Diploma
Your Drivers License (feel free to black out the address and license number with electrical tape/digitally)
A tax return for your Stategic Defense Institute (with the appropriate sensitive areas blacked out of course)

If you scan these in, then email me at: jtumminaro@attbi.net then you will at least prove you are not a total bullshitter about your credentials. I will promise not to share the contents of this documents (aside from verfying their validity) to anyone else.

There is the challenge, now step up.

[Master of Ossus]

What chalenge? there are so many things going on here that I don't have a clue what you are talking about.

This one:

Fine Stewart, you want to prove yourself to someone? Here's a challange for you. Use your brand new scanner (either one is fine) and scan the following documents:

Your University Diploma
Your Drivers License (feel free to black out the address and license number with electrical tape/digitally)
A tax return for your Stategic Defense Institute (with the appropriate sensitive areas blacked out of course)

If you scan these in, then email me at: jtumminaro@attbi.net then you will at least prove you are not a total bullshitter about your credentials. I will promise not to share the contents of this documents (aside from verfying their validity) to anyone else.

There is the challenge, now step up.

[Stewart at SDI]

No, I just can't find my cert and am not inclined to look threw the 3,000SF stack of stuff in the basement for it. But if any of you are willing to come over you are wellcome to try.

I'll call your bluff. Where's the facility located? Let's have a member of the board who lives near there go to the nonexistant address and prove you're a lying sack of shit.

My address is well known to the board but just for those not paying full attention;
4801 Barreville Rd.
Crystal Lake,
Ill. 60012

Leave plenty of time and we can go to the range too! Whoever can shoot any of my toys they want just pay your own fees and buy your own ammo.

You obviously do not understand. As the inventor/owner and OEO of the SDI organization, I can do just about aything that I want.

Except spell, purchase mundane items, utilize basic computer functions, and back up your claims.

[General Zod]

in case anyone that happens to live by the supposed address wants a map, SwitchBoard.Com is a handy tool. however unsurprisingly i did a search of nearby businesses and nowhere did it mention anything about an SDI.

[Ghost Rider]

Oh good.

Now Stewart.

Are you paid

A. W-2
B. 1099

and is the SDI

A. Schedule C
B. LLC
C. Corporation.

Answer these two small things since you're at least 50+ should be of no difficulty, given the amount of time you've been in business.

[The Dude]

No one is obligated to actually drive to his house to confirm or deny his little stories. If he can't back them up himself, it is perfectly legitimate to consider them bullshit by default.

Of course, it's HARD to scan fictional documents proving fictional credentials in a fictional office with fictional scanners.

[Stewart at SDI]

Ugh.. your incompetence clearly extends to your tagging.

Wrong. There is no reason for the gas to remain incandescent as it expands when the original temperature is only a couple thousand K. Moreover, there is no alternate explanation for why the asteroid ISN'T THERE AFTERWARDS.

The gas is visable in two fraims and does not expand appreciatably between them. You can see this for your self if you look. Your assumption that the gas does not have a reason to be incandessant is ludicriss. If the whole asteroid were vaporised in fraim two, then the temperature-pressure of having 4,000 tons minimum of gas compressed into that size cloud would be enormious. It would be visable for many seconds as it cools and would expand hugely. It does none of those things. After all we can see the cloud in fraim three and it has clearly not expanded as we should expect. Furthermore, the model of expansion is all wrong in the pictures. As gas expands in space, most leaves the origional volume very quickly. ~89% in the first 50% expansion of the radius of the cloud. That leaves only ~11% of the gas inside the origional volume of the cloud. That is why explosions in space typicaly look like hollow rings. There is very quickly nothing left in the center of the cloud. By the time the cloud's radius has expanded 100% there is just over 1% of the origional gas left in the origional volume.

No one with a degree in physics will disput this.

Your bluster; your burden of proof. Put up or shut up.

I have made the assertion and none there has posted any reputable source disputing it. I have even writen Dr. Saxton, who has so far not answered my letter. I wonder if he is willing to argue against my hypothisis? If not, why?

Sincerely, Stewart.

[General Zod]

I have even writen Dr. Saxton, who has so far not answered my letter. I wonder if he is willing to argue against my hypothisis? If not, why?

or maybe he simply doesn't give a shit. which is far more plausible.

[The Kernel]

Gee, you can't find your University diploma nor any document that proves the existance of your Strategic Defense Institute? I'm shocked.

In any case, it seems that since you can't show ANY evidence for your existance or your credentials, you are a liar by default. You expect us to believe that you don't even have a tax document from the IRS relating to your corporation? How about the legal documents from the establishment of your company? Your lawyer who filed the original papers should still have copies, and I'm sure that you could arrange to scan them and send them to me for verification. Of course, you won't do that since you are a liar and a fraud.

Has it occured to you Stewie that every time you someone has challenged you to back up your claims with evidence that you have found some excuse to avoid doing so? What do you think this does for your credibility (or lack thereof)?

[Tribun]

I have even writen Dr. Saxton, who has so far not answered my letter. I wonder if he is willing to argue against my hypothisis? If not, why?

or maybe he simply doesn't give a shit. which is far more plausible.

And I think that is realistic, because I have written him a mail some time ago, an we had a nice exchange.
So I think he simply not talks to Dorks like Steward.

[Tribun]

Oh, and could someone open a poll about if we should make Steward our newest Village Idiot?

[The Kernel]

Oh, and could someone open a poll about if we should make Steward our newest Village Idiot?

Village Idiot doesn't begin to cover it. This boy is the heir to the throne to the Kingdom of Village Idiots.

[General Zod]

Oh, and could someone open a poll about if we should make Steward our newest Village Idiot?

do we even need a poll in this case? this guy's not much better than seepage.

[Stewart at SDI]

Anyway, you have assumed inanely that the gas does not expand; when all we observe it that the zone of incandescence does not expand. It stands to reason that escaping gas (with its obscenely high surface area to mass ratio) will reach equilibrium with the surrounding space virtually instantaneously.

I assume that the gas does expand. To the volume that we see on the film. The cloud's mass to SA ratio is actualy quite low. If the smallest asteroid positted in this discussion, 20x16M. ovoid, is composed of loose agregate rock at a density of 1.5 then it weighs over 4000 tones. That much gas in a spherical volume of <30M O.D. must have quite a large dencity, don't you think? As long as we see it on film, a minimum of two frames, the dencity must be astrimomical. I think it would take many seconds to expand untill it is no longer visably luminesant.

Let me get this strait. The asteroid is vaporised in between frame one and frame two. In frames two and three we see and incandesant cloud that does not expand more than 25%. It then compleatly vanishes to be replaced by a cloud of dust, that has not been swept away by the expanding gas in fraim four. Which then faids from view also without expanding. Right?

1. IF the asteroid IS vaporised in fraim 2, then why does it (the gas cloud) not expand in fraim three? Don't try the "Ionised" gas does not neccessarily glow in space BS. If it glows in fraims two and three why not in four and why is it not expanding in fraim three, when we can plainly see it?

See above. Escaping gas will drop below the density/temperature required for visible incandescence in nanoseconds.

Does anyone with an education really belive this? If so how come we can clearly see it luminess for two frames and if it, >4,000 metric tons, expands so violently how does it leave dust behind?

The failure of your thought processes astounds me.

2. Lacking said expansion, the yeald of the explosion is clerly in the KILOGRAM class not the kiloton class.

How shameful for the Dean of Technology to be quoting energy in kilograms. Anyway, the liberated energy of a kilogram is on the order of 1e17J, so you're a little on the high side.

Kilograms, refering to yeald of TNT or it's equivilant, or about 4,180,000J. each is a valid compairison, when many on this board have used the fraises "kilotons" and "megatons" to describe the same event.

I noticed that none has so far described a mechanism were the expanding gas could leave a cloud of dust behind. You know, the last 3-4 frames of film.

I have also noted that none has answered my question about the plume of gas or plasma or whatever that takes2-3 frames to get to the asteroid. What is it's function or why do we see it? Why does the incandesant cloud change to dust when it hits?

It is simple, the Direct Energy Transfer to heat of "Vaporisation" model has so many holes in it that no serious person can defend it under their own name.

My chalenge stands unanswered!

Sincerely, Stewart.

[Stewart at SDI]

Seems I am not the only one here who can't spell.

Have you even bothered to check my profile Steward?
I'm no native Engilish speaker.

So suck my cock, dumbass!

No I have not checked your profile. Why should that matter to a spell checker? My origional thought was that you were just to lazy to proof read your own post. I still think that.

I freely admit to being lazy and that it's not worth my time to check my typing.

Sincerely, Stewart.

[Master of Ossus]

My chalenge stands unanswered!

Sincerely, Stewart.

ROFLMAO!

STEWART HAS JUST ACCUSED US OF IGNORING HIS CHALLENGE!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

In short, this amuses me greatly.

[The Dude]

Ugh.. your incompetence clearly extends to your tagging.

The irony of you fucking up the quote tags on this is almost too good to be true.

The gas is visable in two fraims and does not expand appreciatably between them. You can see this for your self if you look. Your assumption that the gas does not have a reason to be incandessant is ludicriss.

It's called cooling and expansion, fucktard. In order to be visibly glowing, the gas must have a minimum combination of temperature and density. When one or both of these drop below a critical level, the gas becomes transparent.

If the whole asteroid were vaporised in fraim two, then the temperature-pressure of having 4,000 tons minimum of gas compressed into that size cloud would be enormious.

No math - I thought you were an analyst? The immediate pressure would be on the order of 3-4 GPa - barely enough to overcome a high-strengh steel. Since the incandescent material in FRAME 2 is already over twice the diameter of the asteroid, the pressure will have already dropped by an order of magnitude. Not only are you wrong on the facts, but you have failed to show how, even if you were correct, any of this this supports your argument.

It would be visable for many seconds as it cools and would expand hugely.

You seem completely unable to grasp the fact that there is more than one thing going on here at once; the gas is COOLING and EXPANDING. Both will reduce its visibility. The outermost gas will cool extremely rapidly due to the surface area to mass ratio and the large temperature gradient. The cold gas will not be visible.

It does none of those things. After all we can see the cloud in fraim three and it has clearly not expanded as we should expect.

Only YOU expect this, because you cling dogmatically to the notion that the gas' temperature and density will be constant as it expands.

What remains visible in FRAME 3 is only a portion (the portion with sufficient T and density) of the original mass.

Furthermore, the model of expansion is all wrong in the pictures. As gas expands in space, most leaves the origional volume very quickly. ~89% in the first 50% expansion of the radius of the cloud. That leaves only ~11% of the gas inside the origional volume of the cloud. That is why explosions in space typicaly look like hollow rings.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA

Explosions in space look like hollow rings???

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAH

Try getting your science from somewhere other than sci-fi movies. The expansion of gas will be SPHERICAL in space.

There is very quickly nothing left in the center of the cloud. By the time the cloud's radius has expanded 100% there is just over 1% of the origional gas left in the origional volume.

You are a fucking moron. When the cloud's radius has doubled, the volume will have quadrupled, and therefore some 25% of the original gas will occupy the original volume. It seems we must add basic algebra to your impressive list of incompetencies.

No one with a degree in physics will disput this.

Who needs a physics degree? A high-school freshman could refute such shoddy calculations.

I have made the assertion and none there has posted any reputable source disputing it.

Thanks for confirming that you do not understand the concept of burden of proof. To boot, you are again incorrect on the facts; all of your assertions concerning the asteroid issue have been refuted repeatedly. Fully 100% of your assertions regarding your own abilities and credentials remain unsubstantiated.

I notice you glossed over the fact that you have no viable explanation for why the asteroid is NOT THERE after the flash if it was not vapourized. Sounds like a concession to me.

[Stewart at SDI]

Taek Won Do was a demonstration sport for the first time at the 1988 Olympics, and is a regular competition sport since the 2000 games.
Even if your "Cpt. Kim" was at the 1988 games, he would have been over 39. When did you take these lessons? Can't be later than '67, and Kim would have to be at least 18 to be in the ROKA, and even that is extremely young for a MA teacher. Competitors older than 30 are rare, but I never heard of anyone aged 40+. Do you? Can you provide sources?

1968, summer, I think he was entered in Judo? and I can not remember if he went before or after I saw him in the RVN. I think he was ~30 at the time, but I have a very hard time judging age of orientals now and did not have a clue back then.

I can't remember the exact details but do remember hearing of several olympic competiters over the age of 40 and even over 50. I also seem to remember a medalist hammer thrower or some other wierd sport who was 67 or something like that. All the very best marathoners are ~31 or so. I think that you should check the olympic data base to know for shure, so that you can get back to the rest of us with lives so we can know for sure too!

Sincerely, Stewart.

[The Kernel]

Hey Stewart. Why don't you answer Ghost Rider's questions about your Strategic Defense Institute? I've reprinted them here, just for you.

Oh good.

Now Stewart.

Are you paid

A. W-2
B. 1099

and is the SDI

A. Schedule C
B. LLC
C. Corporation.

Answer these two small things since you're at least 50+ should be of no difficulty, given the amount of time you've been in business.