Split Thread The validity of classical physics (split from: DWFTTW)

[humber]

Diversion.
On the contrary. If the "differential" is such that the airspeed is below the stall speed, the aircraft will fall. Groundspeed is irrelevant.

Look up these terms: KTAS, KIAS.

Diversion, down a dead end.

 

[GregLondon]

There's this guy I know in the real world. He likes to pontificate about quantum physics. he doesn't know anything about it, but he loves to talk about it. non-technical people will sometimes tell him how brilliant he is after he's gone on some meaningless ramble that invokes a number of quantum buzzwords. He builds turnip twaddlers for a living and sells them. He loves to say outrageous stuff with a straight face and only starts to grin when people give a shocked look and sputter at something utterly incredulous he said.

Humber reminds me a lot of this guy.

When Humber used "max power theorem" in a completely bogus way, this guy immediately popped in my head. I'm not a physicist, but I do know a bit about physics, and every once in a while, this guy would say stuff about something I actually knew a little bit about, and I'd know he was fabricating every single word.

You guys are being pwned by Humber.

If he knows more than he says, you're being completely duped.
If he knows as much as he says (i.e. nothing), then if he's anything like this guy I know, he's simply feeding off the reaction he gets to make himself feel superior.

Either way, he's pwning you. I admit to trying to address him myself, but it wasn't long before I withdrew. If you want to learn more about the cart, there are plenty of ways to do it amongst people who understand the cart. You just have to allow people to ask legitimate questions and make legitimate mistakes, without responding by trying to make the person look even dumber.

Those who are poking Humber to see what crazy thing he'll say next, to get quotes out of him to make fun of, are being pwned by Humber. He's saying crazy things just to keep you going along with him. He's saying crazy things to get you to react to him. You're doing exactly what he wants.

Whether Humber knows more than he lets on or not, he is pwning you.

 

[humber]

Why do I get the feeling your racing experience is all from a computer game?

Perhaps its because you couch your posts in a tone that suggests you have a bon mot that would stun Oscar Wilde, but transpires be a self-inflicted wound. Game boy.

 

[GregLondon]

Yes, that too. What you mean is that you cannot accept that someone may know more than you, even in your own field. I am not an electronics engineer.

Humber, the only time you demonstrated a mean streak was when I called you on your "max power theorem". Outside of that, you happily spew nonsense without any malice. When you said something very specific that was absolutely wrong, and I called you on it and refused to let you smoke your way out of it, that was when you showed a mean streak.

That would tell me that you probably really don't know anything about physics, and have convinced yourself you do simply because you can bluff your way out of any issue. So when someone calls you on a blatant and obvious and undeniable scam, you'd have to fact the fact that you don't know what you're talking about. So you get mad.

The fact that you couldn't admit a single mistake also indicates you're bluffing. If you really knew what you were talking about and just making up nonsense for a reaction, you wouldn't have a problem admitting to a mistake now and then, because you really knew it was a mistake, you were just trying to pull a fast one on people. But if you don't actually know what you're talking about, then having to admit it would be very hard. If you've convinced yourself that you're right so long as no one can prove you absolutely and totally wrong, then you'll always try to wriggle out of any mistake. No matter how absurd your response is, as long as you've convinced yourself you've talked your way out of it, you think you're still correct.

I don't know what you do for a living, but this whole thing you got going on here about this silly little propeller cart and this entire bizzaro version of physics you've got going on, is massive compensation for something. Whatever disappointment you've got going on in your life, I'm truly sorry. But this craziness isn't going to give you anything real to hold onto.

It's a con. A sham. Something that someone like James Randi would dismiss quickly and never deal with again.

 

[jjcote]

humber is like potato chips, you keep telling yourself that you're going to put them away and not eat any more, but they're so tasty. I long ago gave up any notion that he'd ever get anything right, and it kind of doesn't matter whether it's because he's a troll or a nutcase. Either way, it's just fun to watch and see what new absurdities he'll come up with. And so we egg him on, like tapping on the glass at the zoo.

 

[mender]

Didn't someone say you also worked on a drilling bit for oil rigs or something?

It's a weird combination, I think.

Strange combos pop up all over. I hold one patent and initiated two others in the field of thermoelectrics and associated hardware, presently make my living building race engines, race cars and street rods, and have one year left in my B. Mus. degree. It's a funny but interesting world.

 

[humber]

There's this guy I know in the real world. He likes to pontificate about quantum physics. he doesn't know anything about it, but he loves to talk about it. non-technical people will sometimes tell him how brilliant he is after he's gone on some meaningless ramble that invokes a number of quantum buzzwords.

Yes, QM is popular in that respect. However, it says absolutely nothing about how much you know.

He builds turnip twaddlers for a living and sells them. He loves to say outrageous stuff with a straight face and only starts to grin when people give a shocked look and sputter at something utterly incredulous he said.
He may be seeing how many turnips he can make you eat.
Humber reminds me a lot of this guy.
When Humber used "max power theorem" in a completely bogus way, this guy immediately popped in my head. I'm not a physicist, but I do know a bit about physics, and every once in a while, this guy would say stuff about something I actually knew a little bit about, and I'd know he was fabricating every single word. You guys are being pwned by Humber.

Self-effacing as ever.

If he knows more than he says, you're being completely duped.
If he knows as much as he says (i.e. nothing), then if he's anything like this guy I know, he's simply feeding off the reaction he gets to make himself feel superior.

Like the "turnip twiddler" you only know that, when he tells you.

Either way, he's pwning you. I admit to trying to address him myself, but it wasn't long before I withdrew. If you want to learn more about the cart, there are plenty of ways to do it amongst people who understand the cart. You just have to allow people to ask legitimate questions and make legitimate mistakes, without responding by trying to make the person look even dumber.
Those who are poking Humber to see what crazy thing he'll say next, to get quotes out of him to make fun of, are being pwned by Humber. He's saying crazy things just to keep you going along with him. He's saying crazy things to get you to react to him. You're doing exactly what he wants.
Whether Humber knows more than he lets on or not, he is pwning you.

A blistering and direct resume, with more personal safety nets that 10 circuses. That means you don't know.

An electronics engineer unfamiliar with maximum power theorem?
Unable to see the connection to mechanics, describing that as 'bogus'

Someone who writes an overblown physics guide, that includes his fave movie scenes and his own unit of momentum?

Avionics? You were in the same building at sometime, perhaps.
I sometimes find myself between the 'lab-rats' and the pilots. Don't try and bluff.

 

[humber]

humber is like potato chips,

You are like the packet.

you keep telling yourself that you're going to put them away and not eat any more, but they're so tasty. I long ago gave up any notion that he'd ever get anything right, and it kind of doesn't matter whether it's because he's a troll or a nutcase. Either way, it's just fun to watch and see what new absurdities he'll come up with. And so we egg him on, like tapping on the glass at the zoo.

 

[H'ethetheth]

You missed both the irony, and the party.

Yes, that is the ticket.

 

[humber]

Strange combos pop up all over. I hold one patent and initiated two others in the field of thermoelectrics and associated hardware, presently make my living building race engines, race cars and street rods, and have one year left in my B. Mus. degree. It's a funny but interesting world.

Yes, Mender. I noticed that those who would seem to be the least qualified, have the broadest range, and a sense of humour.

 

[humber]

Yes, that is the ticket.

Vacuous. You claimed expertise in models, and that gave you some insight into the nature of relative flows and equivalence. Well no. Lamentable understanding.
The fish tank is not only an obvious first-port-of-call idea, but not even close to a treadmill.
As far as the BMW/F1 and the belt, you failed to see that there must be two components to the boundary. The effect of the car over the road, and the wind passing under it. So, even at that level, wind is needed. You avoided addressing that, in order to bark "wrong" at almost everything else. The OMG Brittney Spears remark told me that, and your response, proof.
That's why.

 

[humber]

Humber, the only time you demonstrated a mean streak was when I called you on your "max power theorem". Outside of that, you happily spew nonsense without any malice. When you said something very specific that was absolutely wrong, and I called you on it and refused to let you smoke your way out of it, that was when you showed a mean streak.

No, it was your stubbornness to even accept the idea. I was patient, that is all. The meanness is just fun.
I have currently on my PC, an electrical model of an emergency escape tunnel. Fans, ducts etc, all done as I described. Sent to me to give the once-over. A routine and hum-drum affair.
You do not even have a clue.

Something that someone like James Randi would dismiss quickly and never deal with again.

If he had the mind, he could take your house, your wallet and your girlfriend.
Luckily for you, he is an honest man.

 

[mender]

For arson.

On the ground or the treadmill?

Yes, Mender. I noticed that those who would seem to be the least qualified, have the broadest range, and a sense of humour.

Thanks, I'll take that as a compliment!

 

[humber]

On the ground or the treadmill?



Thanks, I'll take that as a compliment!

It was/is.

 

[RossFW]

No, it was your stubbornness to even accept the idea. I was patient, that is all. The meanness is just fun.
I have currently on my PC, an electrical model of an emergency escape tunnel. Fans, ducts etc, all done as I described. Sent to me to give the once-over. A routine and hum-drum affair.
You do not even have a clue.


If he had the mind, he could take your house, your wallet and your girlfriend.
Luckily for you, he is an honest man.

I patiently asked you to give an example of the use of the term "Negative drag" in Aerodynamics, or cite a use of the term "Cavitation" in a purely gaseous system.

You just started insulting me.........

 

[RossFW]

Dan,

I think this thread might have run it's course.

Yes, Classical Physics has been valdiated, by numerous well written, argued and proven explanations. The fact that one person doesn't get it doesn't detract from that.

Time for the padlock, I feel....

 

[recursive prophet]

I've been thinking about this challenge you put to humber since you first posted it many pages back, Ross, and think in many ways it cuts to the chase. Hard to get my mind around it using humber physics though, and there's a distracting fly in the cockpit. But I will keep working on it and hopefully have your explanations for both tomorrow using hp.

How about it humber? Help a feeble old man across the tarmac? Lay it out for me and save me many gs-hours.

 

[humber]

I patiently asked you to give an example of the use of the term "Negative drag" in Aerodynamics, or cite a use of the term "Cavitation" in a purely gaseous system.

You just started insulting me.........

Well,RossFW, when someone posts an "analysis" of me, based solely on their own counsel, and it is filled with all sorts of insults that some may find offensive, and then bangs on about arrogant pilots..Well, you see where that goes.
If your were genuinely interested in negative drag, you would have found out for yourself. A bit like I did, really.

 

[grmcdorman]

Diversion, down a dead end.

Classic troll behaviour. I will not respond further.

 

[John Freestone]

Good grief. Let me chisel it in stone for you. LIKE a hot air balloon, though not a hot air balloon itself, a kite can use a suspended mass to provide the reactive force normally provided by what most people, )though probably not you), call the string. It that enough for you or do toy still need more?

More, specifically, something to stop it moving backwards, and thus attain lift.

Oh no, come to think of it you're right, I've seen loads of people flying kites by tying bricks to the string.