Mike Collins and the 4th power law [SIC]

[Spike]

Mike Collins wrote:

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_power_law

Describes 1950s study

> https://streets.mn/2016/07/07/chart-of-the-day-vehicle-weight-vs-road-damage-levels/

Chart using 1950s study

> https://higherlogicdownload.s3.amazonaws.com/IPWEA/c7e19de0-08d5-47b7-ac3f-c198b11cd969/UploadedImages/pdfs/Info%20sheets/IS-06_4th_Power_Law.pdf

Quotes 1950s study

> https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/24vqq7/til_pavement_damage_is_proportional_to_the_fourth/

Proof by assertion

> https://johnscreekga.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=253&meta_id=32349

Rule of thumb

> https://pdf.sciencedirectassets.com/

<very big snip>

Feasibility study

> Shall I go on or will you now provide evidence to support your claim that
> we know different theses day?

Please, please don’t go on. You’re so far out of your depth - you
demonstrate so little understanding of what you’re reading. It’s pitiful.
You’re a Phlogiston believer in an Oxygen world.

--
Spike

[Mike Collins]

Thank you for creating my own thread.
Now all you need to do is provide evidence to support your claim that the 4th power rule is no longer valid.

[Mike Collins]

On Saturday, 28 January 2023 at 19:53:51 UTC, Spike wrote:

Somehow men with pencils and slide rules managed to put a man on the moon based on Hoffmann's 1925 work and concorde was designed my men throwing paper airplanes down a wind tunnel.

I remember when I was studying Engineering at Uni a guest lecturer said analogue electrical engineers call digital engineers Bit Freaks and digital electrical engineers call analogue electrical engineers Sir.

[JNugent]

Has it yet been proven that it was ever valid?

[Mike Collins]

Form your own opinion based on available data and report back.
I look forward to reading your thesis.
Don't forget to cite peer reviewed literature to support it and same for opposing views.

[Spike]

Mike Collins <cmik...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, 28 January 2023 at 19:53:51 UTC, Spike wrote:
>> Mike Collins wrote:
>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_power_law
>>
>> Describes 1950s study
>>
>>> https://streets.mn/2016/07/07/chart-of-the-day-vehicle-weight-vs-road-damage-levels/
>>
>> Chart using 1950s study
>>
>>> https://higherlogicdownload.s3.amazonaws.com/IPWEA/c7e19de0-08d5-47b7-ac3f-c198b11cd969/UploadedImages/pdfs/Info%20sheets/IS-06_4th_Power_Law.pdf
>>>
>>
>> Quotes 1950s study
>>
>>> https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/24vqq7/til_pavement_damage_is_proportional_to_the_fourth/
>>>
>>
>> Proof by assertion
>>

>>> https://johnscreekga.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=1&clip_id%3&meta_id2349

>>
>> Rule of thumb
>>
>>> https://pdf.sciencedirectassets.com/
>>
>> <very big snip>
>>
>> Feasibility study
>>
>>> Shall I go on or will you now provide evidence to support your claim that
>>> we know different theses day?
>>
>> Please, please don t go on. You re so far out of your depth - you
>> demonstrate so little understanding of what you re reading. It s pitiful.
>> You re a Phlogiston believer in an Oxygen world.
>>
>> --
>> Spike

> Thank you for creating my own thread.

It wouldn’t have been necessary had you not posted a message containing an
absurdly long url.

This thread was a successful attempt to discover what in fact would get
past the news server.

> Now all you need to do is provide evidence to support your claim that the
> 4th power rule is no longer valid.

You brought up the issue of what you believe is ‘the fourth power rule’,
so it’s up to you to back it up. To help you, I hinted as to why that was a
lost cause, but no, you’ve tried to duck, dive, and deflect your way round
the problem you created for yourself. It isn’t up to anyone else to get you
out of the self-created pothole in which you find yourself.

PS: it turns out the ‘fourth power rule’ is rather flexible, suggesting it
was on shaky grounds to start with. HTH

--
Spike

[Spike]

Mike Collins <cmik...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, 28 January 2023 at 19:53:51 UTC, Spike wrote:
>> Mike Collins wrote:
>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_power_law
>>
>> Describes 1950s study
>>
>>> https://streets.mn/2016/07/07/chart-of-the-day-vehicle-weight-vs-road-damage-levels/
>>
>> Chart using 1950s study
>>
>>> https://higherlogicdownload.s3.amazonaws.com/IPWEA/c7e19de0-08d5-47b7-ac3f-c198b11cd969/UploadedImages/pdfs/Info%20sheets/IS-06_4th_Power_Law.pdf
>>>
>>
>> Quotes 1950s study
>>
>>> https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/24vqq7/til_pavement_damage_is_proportional_to_the_fourth/
>>>
>>
>> Proof by assertion
>>

>>> https://johnscreekga.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=1&clip_id%3&meta_id2349

>>
>> Rule of thumb
>>
>>> https://pdf.sciencedirectassets.com/
>>
>> <very big snip>
>>
>> Feasibility study
>>
>>> Shall I go on or will you now provide evidence to support your claim that
>>> we know different theses day?
>>
>> Please, please don t go on. You re so far out of your depth - you
>> demonstrate so little understanding of what you re reading. It s pitiful.
>> You re a Phlogiston believer in an Oxygen world.
>>
>> --
>> Spike

> Somehow men with pencils and slide rules managed to put a man on the moon
> based on Hoffmann's 1925 work

Nope, man was put on the Moon with the extensive and critical use of
computers.

> and concorde was designed my men throwing paper airplanes down a wind tunnel.

Roaring commercial success that was.

> I remember when I was studying Engineering at Uni a guest lecturer said
> analogue electrical engineers call digital engineers Bit Freaks and
> digital electrical engineers call analogue electrical engineers Sir.

Sixty years later, they don’t.

--
Spike

[Mike Collins]

You said the 4th power rule was no longer valid in the computer age so it is up to you to provide the evidence.

>
> PS: it turns out the ‘fourth power rule’ is rather flexible, suggesting it
> was on shaky grounds to start with. HTH

So cite the peer reviewed evidence.

[Mike Collins]

Based on Hoffmann.

> > and concorde was designed my men throwing paper airplanes down a wind tunnel.
> Roaring commercial success that was.

It was a great technological achievement.

[JNugent]

So that's a "no".

Thank you.

[Spike]

You introduced the so-called ‘fourth power rule’ into the discussion, so it
is up to you to justify that.

>> PS: it turns out the ‘fourth power rule’ is rather flexible, suggesting it
>> was on shaky grounds to start with. HTH

> So cite the peer reviewed evidence.

It was in the stuff you quoted, which you clearly haven’t read. Whether
that counts as ‘peer reviewed evidence’ I’ll leave to you.


--
Spike

[Mike Collins]

So you have no evidence to support your claim that the 4th power rule no longer applies.

[Spike]

The actual point here is that you have no evidence other than anecdote to
support your vaunted ‘fourth power rule’ that you gratuitously chose to
foist on to the discussion.

--
Spike

[Mike Collins]

No, you accepted the 4th power law was based on 50's real world experiments but you claimed it is no longer valid. You need to supply evidence to support this claim.

[Spike]

I can go round this loop as many times as it takes:

*You* introduced what you said was the ‘fourth power law’

…so…

*You* substantiate it.

HTH

--
Spike

[Mike Collins]

You admitted the 4th power law was valid in the 50's and claimed it is no longer valid so the burden of proof to support this claim is on you.

[Mike Collins]

AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials). "Guide for design of pavement structures." (1993).

[Spike]

Mike Collins wrote:

> Spike wrote:

>> *You* introduced what you said was the ‘fourth power law’

>> …so…

>> *You* substantiate it.

> You admitted the 4th power law was valid in the 50's and claimed it is no
> longer valid so the burden of proof to support this claim is on you.

I refer the gentleman to my previous answer.

--
Spike

[Mike Collins]

So you have no evidence to support your claim.

[Spike]

I refer you to my comments, which you have quoted above.

--
Spike

[Spike]

And?

--
Spike

[Mike Collins]

And now you supply evidence to support your claim that the 4th power rule was valid in the 50's but is no longer valid.

[Spike]

I refer you to the replies I made on the previous occasions you have raised
this self-created non-issue.

--
Spike

[Mike Collins]

So still no evidence to support your claim that the 4th power rule was valid in the 50's but is no longer valid.

[Spike]

You gratuitously introduced your ‘fourth power law’ into the discussion, so
you justify it; I have no obligation to do so.

--
Spike

[Mike Collins]

You claimed the 4th power law was valid in the 50's but was no longer valid so you need to provide evidence to support that claim.

[Spike]

[Mike Collins]

You stated the 4th power law was valid in the 50's but is no longer valid so you have to provide evidence to support that claim.

[Spike]

[Mike Collins]

[Spike]

[Mike Collins]

[Spike]

“The day begins as it will end…”

I refer you to my previous replies to your deflective assertion.

--
Spike

[Mike Collins]

On this planet the day begins with the Sun rising in the East and ends with the Sun setting in the West. Which planet are you from?
No surprise an alien visitor would think cars are the dominant life form.

Did your planet squander irreplaceable hydrocarbon deposits the way we have?

[Spike]

It could be worse, if they thought bicycles were the dominant species.

> Did your planet squander irreplaceable hydrocarbon deposits the way we have?

That phrase ends “…with the ground crew”.

--
Spike

[Mike Collins]

Why?
Motorists seem to think they must have a better car than their neighbours.
Cyclists find a pedal cycle they are comfortable with.
I have a Dawes Karakum with a SON20 hub dynamo, Selle Brookland saddle and Magura rim brakes. A solid reliable workhorse.
I don't feel the need to replace it because there are newer pedal cycles on the road.

> > Did your planet squander irreplaceable hydrocarbon deposits the way we have?
> That phrase ends “…with the ground crew”.
>
> --
> Spike

You still need to provide evidence the 4th power law is no longer valid.

[Spike]

An uninteresting exercise in virtue signalling.

>>> Did your planet squander irreplaceable hydrocarbon deposits the way we have?
>> That phrase ends “…with the ground crew”.
>>
>> --
>> Spike

> You still need to provide evidence the 4th power law is no longer valid.

To put you out of your misery, one of the five references you posted says
in effect that your mythical ‘fourth power law’ was just that.

Since you obviously read and understood those references, otherwise you
wouldn’t have posted them, there is no need for me to point to the exact
source as you will already be familiar with it.

It is interesting watching you try to manoeuvre unsuccessfully round the
issue you created for yourself, as one at least of your own references
condemns you.

--
Spike

[Mike Collins]

So you admit the 4th power law was valid in the 50's.

Now all you need to do is provide evidence to support your claim that it is no longer valid.

[JNugent]

On 04/02/2023 11:43 am, Mike Collins wrote:

[ ... ]

[To someone:]

> So you admit the 4th power law was valid in the 50's. > Now all you need to do is provide evidence to support your claim that
it is no longer valid.

Why don't you just cite the literature which formulated and validated
this "law" you mention?

[Mike Collins]

I don't need to. You, in your Spike incarnation, have accepted the 4th power of axle weight law relating to road damage is true based on 1950's experiments. Spike said "we know better now", so must provide evidence to support that claim.

[Spike]

Nope. I’m *stating* it was mythical back then, supported by at least one of
your references,

> Now all you need to do is provide evidence to support your claim that it
> is no longer valid.

You should have read your own references.

--
Spike

[Spike]

It isn’t a ‘law’.

--
Spike

[JNugent]

Top up your cannabis level.

[Mike Collins]

So no evidence to support your claim.

[Mike Collins]

Just like Newton's laws of motion are not laws.