Reply #177: Semantics.

[eomer]

All mass that is ejected originated in either Part A or Part C because no mass originates in Part B (its mass comes originally from A or C). The adjustment that Bazant makes is (correctly) to subtract the ejection mass from Part B. But whether you want to think of that mass has having become categorized as Part B at the instant that it is liberated from A or C and then subtracted from B as it is ejected or, alternatively, as having never being categorized as Part B is just an irrelevant naming issue. It has nothing to do with the calculations. Either way the ejected mass needs to not be included in A, B, or C in the calculations.

Bazant does adjust for some mass that originated in A and then gets ejected. He does not adjust for any mass that originated in C being ejected. He assumes that C remains a rigid and intact unit that loses no mass. This is obviously incorrect based on the visual evidence. Bazant takes credit in the crushing force for mass and kinetic energy that in fact was ejected.