He's trying to compare momentum and kinetic energy using a manner in which they are not designed to be compared, except maybe through a concept called "impulse."
http://www.physicsforums.com/archive/topic/10591-1.htmlThis explains why an object that has 4x the mass, takes 2x the impulse (fuel) as he mentions in his first assertion.
---J
>Hi Hilmar,
>
>The author of the below link provides two proofs that the mathematical equation for kinetic energy may be incorrect. Is this guy way out in right field, or is it possible that errors could exist in unproved physic works, like the effects of relativity on aging, worm hole, and time wraps, etc.
>
>
http://nov55.com/cnr.html>
>Accepting an equation like the one you provided in your example, that has not been proved, is kind of like writing a VFP program and assuming it will work exactly as conceived with debugging. It is in the debugging that the program errors can be worked out. To expect the program to run exactly as conceived without debugging may be asking a little to much.
>
>Regards,
>
>LelandJ
