Comments by "Mike" (@StarNumbers) on "MIT OpenCourseWare" channel.

@achalsinghal7115 Because you (and maybe others) cannot respond on the basis of merit. A person could spend a lot of money getting a law degree but that does not mean he/she must win every case. In your pathetic case, you would think one must accept the lawyer's statements without rebuttal. Fool and his money will soon part.
6
You lost determinism when you flip a coin. Write parents to send more money.
3
Pathetic. The ratio of absorbed/passing photons is a function of the polarizing angle alpha, which is the independent variable. There is no probability involved! Redoing the equation to give a single photon both (x, y) states is plainly stupid because the co-joined states do not give the photon any new (experimentally confirmed) attributes after it leaves the polarizer. This guy is not teaching, he's preaching and my money ain't here.
3
@UteChewb Right on. There is an alt physics guy Eric Dollard and he explains the imaginary number in its rotational application. And yes, the i is an operator. This MIT stuff is just mechanics of algebra and I come visit just to have fun with professing people.
2
A shill can only repeat the obvious -- it's in the public.
2
The nay-sayers the likes of Buffet do it so that they can have time to get in on the ground floor. The academia is blind or stupid
1
Is the reciprocal of i just i? After all, the reciprocal of -1 is -1. So, let's say that it is: i = 1/i if I square both sides we get -1 = -1 Looks like it is proven. But, if I multiply both sides by i, we get -1 = 1 Hmm, yea, what? Is this MIT professor trying to sell you that wrong answers are good? The next thing you know he will say the earth is a ball with atmosphere that does not get sucked out into the infinite vacuum. Your money, but I'm not paying for Nasa.
1
@flumpyhumpy Of course, you are clueless
1
@flumpyhumpy So you say that the reciprocal of i is i? You got no explanation for the result - only a rule. Ok, 1/i = -i Now, square both sides and get -1 = 1 Looks like the same "what the ..." Got another rule now?
1
@98danielray Yes, that's one possibility when the equation is arithmetically operated on (by squaring both sides)
1
@flumpyhumpy Change your name to Snort
1
The presenter states twice that a photon cannot be divided (and I agree with that). So, how does the Compton Effect come in? Hello! Do you really think this is science? Yea, when talking about one thing then completely ignore another contradicting thing and vice versa. Now shut up and pay.
1
Imaginary numbers yield additional solutions to quadratic equations. Now, what in nature is 2-dimensional? Ask this or another professor and I bet they are all clueless
1
@NilodeRoock That's 1d
1
@NilodeRoock Think ccw and ccw rotation in a circle. Eric P. Dollard and his four quadrant electricity. Also, (don't) think Einstein, for he did not perform a single experiment in his whole life.
1
Silly. It requires photon's energy to be split based on some hidden variable (work function). But most importantly it ignores the conservation of momentum, which postulates that the energy of colliding bodies is distributed equally between the bodies. The work function mechanism is fantasy considering that in gas the absorption of light works over windows of particular frequencies. Einstein did not uncover'or explain some fundamental relationship of matter. My guess is that a photoelectric cell's efficiency will level off at 50% in deference to the conservation of mo. My bet is that the energy of photo-electrons will not increase linearly with impinging photons' energy and do so forever -- as the professor's presentation suggests.
1
Hugh Jones You can talk the talk ...
1
@gkollias14 Call it a prediction that the photonic effect efficiency will level off at 50%. As is the the case with you, it is better not to think if you cannot make an argument.
1
@IamLegend573 Make an argument if you can
1
@stanydevito Perhaps the best place to start is to appreciate that the reduced photon can only result in 50-50 energy split (photon is an even function). In case of the resulting electron movement the electron thus receives but one half of the photon's energy, the other half going to the core. Ph el effect happens when the electron receives energy in excess of the ionization energy. For completion, if a photon reduces within a molecule, the molecule locally expands and this is the mechanism of heat-pressure transformation. Almost all photonic physics is corrupted for the sake of popularization. I wrote a book (Quantum Pythagoreans) which ealso explains the mechanic of the light mill. Much more fun than debunking Einstein
1
@stanydevito Have fun.
1
The fool and his money will soon part
1
@yasinozkan839 Cannot make a case, eh?
1