Morons

[Anonymous]

You aren't arguing with me, you are arguing against the scientific fact. I will ask my chemistry teacher tomorrow, and see what he says, if he says you are right I might admit I am wrong. I will let you know tomorrow.

[edkowal]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098
So you know more about it than the Army, I see.

Glad to see that you agree with me.

What I was attempting to show you was that you cannot take all of your education from the internet.

The reason that some of those quotations from different websites "sound familiar" is that they are the EXACT SAME quotation, but posted to different websites. That does not make the statement that was made any truer than the first time it's posted.

If a statement which is incorrect is posted on a fairly technical topic, it is still wrong, no matter how many times it gets quoted by others. Studies have been made about the public's level of understanding of scientific concepts, and even things which people should have direct experience of. In general, people misunderstand scientific concepts.

I stand by my statements. Ask someone who knows what they're talking about. For example, ask Tom Diehl.

-Ed

[dharmon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

You aren't arguing with me, you are arguing against the scientific fact. I will ask my chemistry teacher tomorrow, and see what he says, if he says you are right I might admit I am wrong. I will let you know tomorrow.

Well to borrow a phrase I hear often from your age group...."Whatever..."

[Anonymous]

You mean to tell me that all of those medical studies have it wrong. The reason they sound familiar is it is the same quote from the Army testing at Aberdeen. They get their information from the Army. It is readily available information. I found 9 places that list it. I challenge you to find even one official (not just a forum) internet site saying the plasma effect is a hoax, and that it can’t happen. Plasma is matter heated beyond the gas state, why is it so impossible? How fast do you experts calculate it would have to be traveling? To expand on my proof, some of them are forums, which have very little credibility, since they are just yahoos me. However a good number are information on weapons and studies done about depleted uranium. A television show can be wrong, a web site can be wrong, but how many can be wrong, the numbers are not in your favor?

[CopCarSS]

Does anyone else find it at least mildly interesting that we've arrived here, a million miles from anything remotely railroad related, due to the following quasi-joke?

QUOTE: This kinda reminds me of a story from Iraq. Story goes, a M1A1 tank crew noticed an insurgent aiming a rifle at them and managed to fire a shot off . Now what happened next is .

A. tank crew poopied in their pants.
B. Insurgent poopied in his pants.
C. insurgent ran like the coward he was.
D. Tank crew returned fire with a SABO round / thus ending the problem.

The answer is D. I saw the video on Military.com to comfirm this story.

I might have to save this thread. Could be useful for doctoral dissertation work should I ever pursue psychology. I can see it now: The Dynamics of Extratopical Discussion in an Internet Based Forum. It would of course be served with the prerequisite popcorn!
[(-D]

[chad thomas]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CopCarSS

Does anyone else find it at least mildly interesting that we've arrived here, a million miles from anything remotely railroad related, due to the following quasi-joke?

QUOTE: This kinda reminds me of a story from Iraq. Story goes, a M1A1 tank crew noticed an insurgent aiming a rifle at them and managed to fire a shot off . Now what happened next is .

A. tank crew poopied in their pants.
B. Insurgent poopied in his pants.
C. insurgent ran like the coward he was.
D. Tank crew returned fire with a SABO round / thus ending the problem.

The answer is D. I saw the video on Military.com to comfirm this story.

I might have to save this thread. Could be useful for doctoral dissertation work should I ever pursue psychology. I can see it now: The Dynamics of Extratopical Discussion in an Internet Based Forum. It would of course be served with the prerequisite popcorn!
[(-D]

[(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D] Yup.

[TomDiehl]

Quoted from Lotus098 entry on page 1:

Those sabots create a vacumn behind them, they also move so fast plasma forms ont the front of the round it vaproizes armor as it hits. I saw a video where three guys are hidding behind a corner. The tank fires a sabot round down the road not even at these guys. Well, they get sucked right out onto the street in front of the tank, their Gihad ended real quick too.

Back to my entry:

In that Loooonnnggg winded physics dissertation, I still fail to find any reference to how it "vaporizes armor as it hits" or "The tank fires a sabot round down the road not even at these guys. Well, they get sucked right out onto the street in front of the tank."

Too much embellishing of the facts takes them to the point of inaccuracy.

Seems like my "feeble mind" is a result of your inability to read.

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

You aren't arguing with me, you are arguing against the scientific fact. I will ask my chemistry teacher tomorrow, and see what he says, if he says you are right I might admit I am wrong. I will let you know tomorrow.

Perhaps you should print this topic out and have him read what you've posted, especially the first entries where you were so far off base. The later entries do not support your earlier claims of "vaproizing armor" or "sucking people out into the street in the wake of the round"

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

Quoted from Lotus098 entry on page 1:

Those sabots create a vacumn behind them, they also move so fast plasma forms ont the front of the round it vaproizes armor as it hits. I saw a video where three guys are hidding behind a corner. The tank fires a sabot round down the road not even at these guys. Well, they get sucked right out onto the street in front of the tank, their Gihad ended real quick too.

Back to my entry:

In that Loooonnnggg winded physics dissertation, I still fail to find any reference to how it "vaporizes armor as it hits" or "The tank fires a sabot round down the road not even at these guys. Well, they get sucked right out onto the street in front of the tank."

Too much embellishing of the facts takes them to the point of inaccuracy.

Seems like my "feeble mind" is a result of your inability to read.

[V]I told you people three times, I made a mistake on the first post. I did some research. We aren't arguing this, I know what you have quoted from me is wrong; I made a mistake. So like any good scientist I consulted experts, and did some research. So far an atomic engineer, two marines, several television shows, and 9 places on the Internet, saying sabot rounds do form plasma when impacting a target at a close enough range.
DON’T TAKE MY WORD FOR IT!!!!!!!!!!
I am sorry I posted the first time without checking.

I would like to hear you expert opinion of my plasma evidence, instead of your trying to destroy my credibility based on one post I admitted I was wrong. I will print this out and show it to my chemistry teacher. Some wind should be created, similar to a semi driving by at 70MPH, but not like I said.

[TomDiehl]

Very simple:

On page 1, you claim the plasma is formed by the friction of the round travelling through the air. I ask if it's a DU or Tungsten penetrator to see if you have any idea what you're talking about.

On page 4, after consulting with a "tank commander" you now state the plasma is formed by the friction of the round penetrating the armor plate (finally accurate) but persist on stating that it "vaporizes the armor". Armor is a solid, plasma is half way between solid and liquid, vapor is gas. That probably won't be possible until we develop the phase cannons (a la Star Trek)

Still havn't seen how they create such a wake they "suck people out into the street."

[Anonymous]

Well now I am glad we came to a conclusion here. So, we agree so far that:

1. A depleted Uranium sabot round will form plasma, when it strikes the target.
2. It will suck people out of the target, but not the street.
3. It does melt the armor, but not vaporize it.

Is this right? I assumed, in my limited knowledge that since plasma is a higher energy state than gas, that gas would also be created. I talked to my chemistry teacher, he basically said that it does form plasma, but doesn't vaporize the armor, as I said. He also said people are skeptical, because they think of Star Wars when you mention plasma.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by edkowal

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098
So you know more about it than the Army, I see.

I stand by my statements. Ask someone who knows what they're talking about. For example, ask Tom Diehl.

-Ed

I did!

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

Well now I am glad we came to a conclusion here. So, we agree so far that:

1. A depleted Uranium sabot round will form plasma, when it strikes the target.
2. It will suck people out of the target, but not the street.
3. It does melt the armor, but not vaporize it.

Is this right? I assumed, in my limited knowledge that since plasma is a higher energy state than gas, that gas would also be created. I talked to my chemistry teacher, he basically said that it does form plasma, but doesn't vaporize the armor, as I said. He also said people are skeptical, because they think of Star Wars when you mention plasma.

1. Correct
2. No, people will be blown out of the target. To be sucked out, the air pressure would have to be GREATLY reduced outside by some means. When pressure inside is increased greatly, it's considered "Blown out."
3. Correct. It does melt a small amount of the metal where it penetrates and splatters it around inside the tank. And at that temperature it doesn't take much to do a lot of damage.

There will be a small amount of gas created, but not enough to consider it "vaporizing the armor." THAT's the claim that invoked the Star Wars/Star Trek parallel.