没有哲学的科学正步入集体老年痴呆！

戴榕菁

和专业哲学界一样，失去哲学思辨能力的科学界的一个普遍的病症就是阅读能力的低下，而这种低下本身又伴随着逻辑混乱。。。。。。

以DDWFTTW现象为例，他们会绞尽脑汁花费十多年的功夫试图来说名DDWFTTW没有违背热力学定律，但是就没有人想到过如果DDWFTTW在没有外加动力的情况下都能超风速顺风运行的话，那么它超出风速的那部分就可以用来生产无中生有的能量。。。。。。

一旦有人向他们指出这个连中学生都应该明白的道理时，如同那位“白草”的混乱逻辑就出现了：即便超风速能运行，它仍然需要风在后面吹它。。。。。。今天我还收到一位不知名的不知在哪里得到我的Email的人士给我发来的类似白草的论调。。。。。。这就是典型的哲盲的表现：他们遇到一个问题就绞尽脑汁地只想着这个问题，而忽略了与这个问题相关的其它因素。。。。。。

在DDWFTTW可以不需要外加动力而超风速的现象中，其实一个简单的惯性坐标切换就可以告诉你：在与风速相同的惯性坐标系中，当DDWFTTW已经超出风速时，本来就不存在一个从后面推动DDWFTTW的风力，因此，DDWFTTW就已经是在没有任何来自后面的风力的情况下自己运行了。。。。。。。

而对于这个结论的否认意味着你否认惯性坐标系中的物理特性的等价性，这比违背热力学定律可能更严重。。。。。。这意味着你在课堂里学的物理在火车上就不适用了。。。。。。但是哲盲科棍们管不了这么多。。。当他们一门心思只想着热力学定律的时候，他们可以忽略惯性系的物理等价性。。。下次当他们再遇到惯性系的物理等价性问题时，他们又会忘掉热力学的定律。。。。。。。

总之，没有了哲学的科学在很大程度上正步入集体老年痴呆！

[慕容青草]

我在“跛脚的科学”一文中指出，没有了哲学的科学以为数学和实验可以解决一切，其实早已开始了跛脚。。。

这里所说的白痴Vess马上提供了一个最佳例子：他居然会要我做实验来证实惯性系等价原理。。。

[慕容青草]

那位白痴Vess在被我那样骂了之后居然还有脸继续放屁。下面是他的最新的email和我的回复：

His idiotic email:
【
"You said the the DDWFTTW vehicle would stop running if there is no wind."

Yes.

"we can conclude that DDWFTTW vehicle can move in ANY inertial system WITHOUT wind.....this is a simple application of the basic high school knowledge of physics."

Would you ever test this to see for yourself? If successful, this would blow the case wide open in a simple and direct way for everyone to see, including those of us hampered by Aristotelian failure to grasp inertial frame equivalence. From high school on down.
】

My response:
【
So finally you completely expose that you don't know the equivalence of inertial systems at all? From which country are you? I feel pity on the young students of your country who are not getting the proper education of physics as they deserve!
】

看来讲英文的不要脸的脸皮比讲中文的不要脸的还要厚。。。。

[慕容青草]

那位Vess没完没了地给我发胡言乱语的email，实在不堪其扰的之后，我给他回了如下的Email：

【
As long as you continue to email garbage to me, you will take the insult that you deserve.

You are not only uneducated in science and extremely poor in reading, but also lack the basic capacity of doing logical thinking, and don't have the least memory of what you have said....basically your are a shameless idiot.

You said the the DDWFTTW vehicle would stop running if there is no wind. I told you that if you take a frame moving with the wind then there is NO wind blowing on the DDWFTTW vehicle after its speed exceeds the wind, but the DDWFTTW would be still moving unlimitedly based on the repeated demonstrations during the past decade.....that is to say: the DDWFTTW can move unlimited in the system that is moving with the wind....therefore, according to the equivalence of inertial systems, we can conclude that DDWFTTW vehicle can move in ANY inertial system WITHOUT wind.....this is a simple application of the basic high school knowledge of physics.

But you keep sending me garbage emails because you first don't have the knowledge of the equivalence of the inertial systems in physics.....then somehow you seem trying to claim that you do know the knowledge of the equivalence of inertial systems, but still don't see how your claim that the DDWFTTW would stop running when there is no wind would violate the principle of equivalence of inertial systems.....Then finally, after you admit that the DDWFTTW vehicle would not have any wind blowing on its back in a system moving with the wind, you just simply seemed to have FORGOT that you once said that the DDWFTTW vehicle would stop running without wind.

Most importantly, you are such shameless idiot and would waste the time of others by repeating your idiotic mistakes!

Your are a logically confused idiot because you said or claimed to agree on these logically conflicted things: 1) the DDWFTTW would stop running without wind; 2) in an inertial system that runs at the speed of wind, there is NO wind at all, and thus there is no wind blowing on the back of the DDWFTTW vehicle. The ONLY wind in that system is the wind caused by the motion of the vehicle, and thus the wind comes from front not from back, at the same speed of the vehicle; 3) physics are the same in all inertial systems; 4) both earth system so as the ground of earth and the system moving with the wind are inertial systems;

How can you say or agree on all the above things without any feeling of logical difficulty in your mind unless your mind is severely messed up? Do you have any local clinic to help you with your problem of basic logical thinking???

So you are such a shameless idiot that would feel no guilt to waste the time of others by brazenly repeating your idiotic mistake!!!

】

大家可以自己去查字典翻译上面这段文字。。。这段文字同样使用于讲中文的人，不论是在哪个网站。。。



附录：

下面是文学城论坛的一位名叫“老健”的读者的评论：

【看了下那个Blackbird car, 是很有意思，值得思量，不过这并不违反能量守恒，也不明白你的哲学和这个有何关系 -老键- ♂ 给 老键 发送悄悄话 老键 的博客首页 老键 的个人群组 (0 bytes) (2 reads) 01/02/2022 postreply 22:16:30】

如果还有哪位愿意与Vess为伍，也不妨象那位老健一样自我暴露一下。。。

[慕容青草]

下面是在万维和网友的对话：

作者：有哲 回复 慕容青草 留言时间：2022-01-02 19:22:12

应是 ：没有科学的哲学正步入集体老年痴呆！

作者：慕容青草 回复 有哲 留言时间：2022-01-02 20:10:59

先明确一点：我们这里说的科学或哲学都指的是专业科学和专业哲学这两个社会领域，而不是科学和哲学这两个逻辑领域。。。

在明确了上述这点之后，难道你是说专业哲学还活着？这倒是考古新闻！

你错了，我这里所举的例子表明的是：没有哲学的科学已步入集体老年痴呆。。。。至于专业哲学，或许你有什么关于他们还活着的内部消息。。。但至少在市面上已经看不出来了。。。

[慕容青草]

下面是那位不知名人士的email：

【

On Sunday, January 2, 2022, 02:43:05 PM EST, Vess Velikov wrote:

Hi. I just read your article "Self-feedback Perpetual Motion and Violation of Thermodynamics Laws" about Rick Cavallaro's Blackbird and similar DDWFTTW carts. In it you seek to solve the paradox of their apparent violation of the laws of thermodynamics. To pick this apart, the article spins away into various scopes of definition, types of perpetual motion, global vs local accounting, succumbing to entropy, etc.

But there is no paradox to solve. The cart does not use perpetual motion, claimed or apparent. The energy source is the wind, defined as the differential motion between air and ground. If there is wind, there is energy to power the cart. If there is no wind, there is no energy. Simple as that. Same as any other wind-powered device (like a sailboat, or wind turbine). The need to spin off into philosophical depths to find a solution to an energy problem for Blackbird, is the same as for a sailboat; that is to say, none.

One twist is an intuition that throws off many people when thinking about this, and that is thinking about the differential motion of air vs. vehicle; and if this was the energy source, then it indeed disappears once the vehicle reaches wind speed, and then (to make matters even worse) reverses. But this is not the energy source; it is the differential motion of air vs. ground. And this stays the same regardless of vehicle speed. And DDWFTTW carts have a clever arrangement of parts, that sits at this interface and taps into this energy no matter the vehicle's speed, or relative/apparent wind.

In a more fine grained view, very simply put, the energy comes from the air processed by the propeller. (This is in the ground frame of reference, but you can analyze from any frame of reference for the same result). The air (blown backward) slows down, therefore its kinetic energy is reduced, and this kinetic energy goes into the cart, used for a combination of acceleration and thermal loss (mechanical and aerodynamic). Mostly acceleration in the beginning, tapering to no acceleration and all thermal loss at the steady-state DDWFTTW speed.

(Your Appendix I analysis contains a fundamental error about the torque on the propeller at faster than wind speed, but I avoided talking about it because it doesn't really bear on the points above. But I will, if you'd like).

】

真不知今天的科学界的这种根本读不懂文章还自淫自嗨的毛病是怎么遗传来的。。。