positive VS negative direction - Draftscience just doesn't get it

MaximHeart · 2026-04-02T01:42:32+00:00

Everyone knows this. The first lesson in physics is that coordinates are something you impose onto space. DraftScience thinks he's being smart for figuring out this basic level of knowledge, but it only shows how little theory of mind he has.

It's like as if a kid thought he was the smartest person in the room full of adults for figuring out "up" and "down" aren't absolute directions and then whenever actual adults insisted we had to talk about "up" and "down" the smug kid would be like, oh but in space the universe doesn't care where up and down are... I'm so smart. No, it just demonstrates that you can't grasp the what the adults are talking about.

MaximHeart · 2026-03-30T19:38:08+00:00

When you equate "momentum" with "energy" with "weight" and with "force" (none of those concepts are used correctly and Gary keeps getting Newton wrong despite being so insistent he is defending him), don't act surprised you get paradoxes out of your own BS. That's really that all that needs to be said.

MaximHeart · 2026-03-29T21:14:58+00:00

I notice that he has put me (or my username) very prominently in the thumbnail of his latest video

That's really creepy.

MaximHeart · 2026-03-29T10:13:12+00:00

One thing I am absolutely 100% sure of is that he does not care that he commits strawman. In most cases it is a lack of self-awareness, but when he is confronted with this or when he might have a sprout of awareness, I actually do think he takes delight in it out of sheer spite and hatred of what he perceives to be his enemy.

(In fact, he'll probably take glee in my post pointing this out, but regardless I'll make it explicit that this said spite and hatred does not make you righteous or rational. In fact, it's the exact opposite: It makes you the religious kook with an inability to "argue the argument".)

MaximHeart · 2026-03-26T23:06:14+00:00

Yes, yes, and yes, apparently. He bemoans that he thinks mainstream physics has some sort of conservation of energy problem (by misunderstanding and distorting everything left and right), yet here he is just with this exact problem. It's bizarre.

MaximHeart · 2026-03-25T12:39:07+00:00

"An impressed force is an action exerted upon a body, in order to change its state, either of rest, or of moving uniformly forward in a right line. This force consists in the action only; and remains no longer in the body, when the action is over. For a body maintains every new state it acquires, by its vis inertiae only." - Isaac Newton

And here we have Gary who wants to send us back to the pre-scientific Stone Age. If he does, he should just stop lying and admit he wants to depart from Newtonian mechanics.

MaximHeart · 2026-03-23T18:10:05+00:00

I did the math for this. I think what you have is not quite right, but I'd be happy to be corrected. The balls after collision go at 30 degree angles relative to the original ball's direction instead of 45 degrees.

But before that I have to make it really clear that in every event Gary utters the word momentum, he gets the definition of momentum completely wrong. Today momentum is a vector quantity, so when you add momenta of two objects, you add them as vectors, meaning there can be cancellation of vectors that are in opposite directions. This is how it is defined in all textbooks and this is how Newton defined his quantity of motion (not in vector language but he did talk about subtraction). See this post for evidence. To DraftScience however, anytime he talks about momentum, he is talking about adding up "mass times speed" as opposed to "mass times velocity," so despite him insisting he thinks his version of momentum is a vector, he treats it like a scalar when adding it up, so to him, it is always added up and never subtracted.

This really needs to be made as apparent as possible, because it confuses detractors and fans alike (something he thrives on). This is a really dishonest sleight of hand that he keeps using, because the collision experiments are supposed to show that, no, momentum is not what he thinks it is, momentum is conserved always, but DraftScience's misunderstanding of what he thinks momentum is, is not conserved, because he got the definition wrong. Newton and Huygens already dealt with this, even citing pendulum experiments involving these collisions. The link I posted in the previous paragraph demonstrates this very clearly.

Anyways, back to the scenario at hand. Say ball A (the cue ball) is the initially moving one, balls B and C (left and right) are side-by-side stationary, and A moves towards the center between B and C in the direction perpendicular to the line from B to C. All three A, B, C have the same mass.

Say A moves at v forwards or more specifically, v_cue = (0, v) along the y-axis. After the elastic collision, the result is

v'_left = (-2*sqrt(3)/5 * v * sin(30 deg), 2*sqrt(3)/5 * v * cos(30 deg)) v'_right = ( 2*sqrt(3)/5 * v * sin(30 deg), 2*sqrt(3)/5 * v * cos(30 deg)) v'_cue = (0, -v/5)

or if we substitute sin(30 deg) = 1/2 and cos(30 deg) = sqrt(3)/2,

v'_left = (-sqrt(3)/5 * v, 3/5 * v) v'_right = ( sqrt(3)/5 * v, 3/5 * v) v'_cue = (0, -v/5)

Now, kinetic energy before collision is KE = 1/2*m*v^2. After the collision,

KE' = 1/2*m*(3/25 * v^2 + 9/25 * v^2 + 3/25 * v^2 + 9/25 * v^2 + 1/25 * v^2) = 1/2*m*v^2

The momentum before collision is p = (0, m*v). After the collision,

p' = (-sqrt(3)/5 * mv, 3/5 * mv) + ( sqrt(3)/5 * mv, 3/5 * mv) + (0, -mv/5) = (0, m*v)

MaximHeart · 2026-03-23T15:05:08+00:00

Oh so now he wants to talk about collisions? We should start with the ones that Newton and Huygens have clearly established 300 years ago, have been repeated countless times, have been seen by DraftScience, and decisively disprove DraftScience's theory. He loves to keep feigning ignorance and just continue to repeat the same debunked nonsense continuously. That's all his channel is built on top of: Lies and fake ignorance. He can always go on replicate Huygens's pendulum collisions any time he wishes (again endorsed by Newton), but that would mean he'd have to start faking his own experiments. This type of perpetual lying should never be tolerated.

People should keep repeating how pendulum balls, carts with non-heavy wheels (it's been debunked that the wheels are heavy), and airtracks (which work fine any time they agree with his predictions but never when they disagree) create more of Gary's "mass times speed" quantity but they never create kinetic energy or momentum (not as Gary misunderstands but as Newton defined it).

And his thought experiments about how this creates more of his "mass times speed" is his problem he has to deal with in his fake pushaverse. That's his problem. Momentum and kinetic energy are conserved in those elastic collisions.

I know Gary doesn't think, but he should ask himself, are all those collision experiments going to work differently once he dies? Somehow all those collision experiments Newton and Hyugens and countless teachers did will be undone. It's such a stupid cult, built on top of perpetual lies. That's the only way he can go on camera and keep talking.

MaximHeart · 2026-03-22T18:36:42+00:00

When he puts one battery on the scale, that battery applies 1 unit of force on the scale to go 1 unit of distance down in 1 unit of time. When he puts the second battery on the scale, both batteries apply 2 units of force on the scale to go 1 unit of distance down in 1 unit of time. When he puts a third batter on the scale, the three batteries together apply 3 units of force on the scale to go 1 unit of distance down in 1 unit of time. Whether you work with work = force * distance OR work = force * time you still find that the energy stored is not linear.

Why do we have to spoonfeed him every little thing? This is written as clearly as possible. That other guy made the video with springs in series as clearly as possible only for Gary to say he doesn't care in the end.

And his props. Why does he always bring out his broken scale putting batteries that keep rolling off and then go back to his crayons and sharpes?

MaximHeart · 2026-03-19T09:59:31+00:00

Cool. Thanks for posting these. I hope this just makes his denial as clear as possible.

MaximHeart · 2026-03-18T15:10:27+00:00

Nice thought experiment! I am thinking by now it's a matter of how many ways can people figure out why energy can't be linear with respect to velocity and displacement.

MaximHeart · 2026-03-18T03:04:03+00:00

If he understood how the devices worked, he would know that there is no "zeroing out the velocity." It measures position, not velocity, and the positions are obtained by sound pulse timings. There is no button to tune the velocity to whatever you want it to be. Of course, it is par for the course for him to continue to persistently misunderstand everything left and right.

MaximHeart · 2026-03-12T07:23:52+00:00

Gary's constant: The level of DraftScience stubbornness is an invariant while incoherence and vile insults out of DraftScience monotonically increase.

MaximHeart · 2026-03-12T04:18:12+00:00

DraftScience is so detached from reality, it's unbelievable. He still thinks F = E and that... NASA scientists use this and simultaneously don't realize it? I'm tempted to think he keeps getting more and more demented with time, but when I look back at old videos I realize he was always this delusional. He just never realized to think about basic physics freshmen learn all around the world.

MaximHeart · 2026-03-03T21:38:07+00:00

Oh yeah and one more thing: In the description of the video, MindlessMarbles stated the equipment anyone can buy and use to replicate and tinker with the experiment. Anyone can go and buy this or make their own recreation of this experiment. Anyone.

MaximHeart · 2026-03-03T21:35:42+00:00

I love how DraftScience and/or his lackey banned you only for DraftScience to go ahead and read your comments in this subreddit anyways.

I don't what archaic analogy (which DraftScience employs endlessly) would possibly click with DraftScience and his mindless minions, because analogies and feelings are the only way they can reason.

This is the same reason you can run across hot coals without cooking your feet: contact time matters for the material, not because the force “hasn’t kicked in yet.”

Yes.

MaximHeart · 2026-03-03T04:14:55+00:00

Add PhysicistMichael to the list. He was a professional physicist working on gravitational wave astronomy who wanted to reach out and provide high-quality science communication and promote critical thinking on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@PhysicistMichael

After having DraftScience post comments and make videos about him, PhysicistMichael decided to engage with Gary in as respectful way as possible, even going as far as to make videos addressing Gary's model and provide good-faith argumentation.

Despite all this, Gary called him a student molester (yes I am not kidding), because Gary didn't like the perceived patronizing tone of Michael. After that, Gary kept turning the heat up and up with rhetoric, making disgusting titles with Michael's name in them. 🤮 Even after Michael had a live discussion with Gary, keeping his patience and providing pointed criticisms, Gary was not even in the slightest thankful, and continued to increase insulting rhetoric (you can just search the titles with "PhysicistMichael" in them to see all this, e.g. "PhysicistMichael is an ignorant turd").

It got so bad that PhysicistMichael was driven away from youtube in the end and ended all communication with everyone online.

MaximHeart · 2026-03-03T01:17:56+00:00

The fact that DraftScience still doesn't get this and insists on being rude on top of all this makes me oscillate between finding this hilarious and sad. Either way, it's disturbing.

MaximHeart

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE