Originally Posted By: OldCowboy
Originally Posted By: Jeff_in_VABch
Nonsense.
There are no explanations, just proposed results. Now that's an informative scientific paper. Even when something is outright incorrect, or in a dynamic environment, we are supposed to believe the surface result?
Who is A.K. Gangopadhyay? Is he a mechanical engineer with 20+ years experience in researching internal combustion engies? No, he has no lubrication or engine design experience except with this paper from what I can tell.
While I appreciate your comments, it appears that you a) do not understand the syntax of citations and b) have not downloaded and read the entire paper. There are 14 pages of explanations and plenty of results; actual, not proposed.
Are you so biased that you think only mechanical engineers are capable of designing experiments to measure friction and wear? What about physicists? Do they know anything about friction and wear?
How do you know the results are "outright incorrect"? Is your name on the paper? Did you participate in the study? Have you conducted a similar study that produced conflicting results?
The complete author list on this paper consisted of contributors from Ford and ConocoPhillips.
From Ford: A.K. Gangopadthyay, R.O. Carter III, D. Uy, S.J. Simko, and M. Riley
From ConocoPhillips: C.B. Phillips and H. Gao.
It appears to me that you are throwing mud at a paper you haven't read because it conflicts with one of your pet beliefs.
Utter nonsense
Originally Posted By: Jeff_in_VABch
Nonsense.
There are no explanations, just proposed results. Now that's an informative scientific paper. Even when something is outright incorrect, or in a dynamic environment, we are supposed to believe the surface result?
Who is A.K. Gangopadhyay? Is he a mechanical engineer with 20+ years experience in researching internal combustion engies? No, he has no lubrication or engine design experience except with this paper from what I can tell.
While I appreciate your comments, it appears that you a) do not understand the syntax of citations and b) have not downloaded and read the entire paper. There are 14 pages of explanations and plenty of results; actual, not proposed.
Are you so biased that you think only mechanical engineers are capable of designing experiments to measure friction and wear? What about physicists? Do they know anything about friction and wear?
How do you know the results are "outright incorrect"? Is your name on the paper? Did you participate in the study? Have you conducted a similar study that produced conflicting results?
The complete author list on this paper consisted of contributors from Ford and ConocoPhillips.
From Ford: A.K. Gangopadthyay, R.O. Carter III, D. Uy, S.J. Simko, and M. Riley
From ConocoPhillips: C.B. Phillips and H. Gao.
It appears to me that you are throwing mud at a paper you haven't read because it conflicts with one of your pet beliefs.
Utter nonsense
