Merged DDWFTTW in a “Real” Wind

[humber]

Wow - sorry to hear about your farm. Glad you're OK.

Maybe Ynot hit it.

 

[humber]

Absolutely!
Hasn't this been a semantics argument from the beginning?
Long ago and far away, I got caught up in a hppv contest; the one for human powered boats; prize money for exceeding 20 knots; perhaps you know about this; I've been out of touch for years...anyway, my design was rejected by the judges because it involved a spring, of sorts. (actually, more like a propulsive, boingy flagella device) that was NOT pre-loaded. It had to be 'wound up' during the run, by human power, which, to me, was clearly within the spirit of the contest.

Hence, my frustration with semantics arguments, and the occasional over-bearing 'correctness-in-spite-of science' stance of the judges of such events, whom often have little else to add to the discussion.

Analogous to this, yet perhaps off-topic here, is the realm of pro-bike racing, which to this day, reject increased sophistication of human powered transport machines because they don't fit the historical (petty and arbitrary) definition of what a bicycle must be to be called a bicycle.

I have a small chip on my shoulder concerning such matters...mostly because it stifles the true advances we have made, collectively, in a field that is important (to me, at least), basically trying to do more with less.

Excuse the mini-rant, please. I had my 15 minutes of fame in 1984 by building a house that required no heater; this was in Pennsylvania, btw.
This house ran into endless bureaucratic hassles, even though it was featured and explained in some high volume magazines at the time.
Guess what initially got it condemned?!
It didn't have enough insulation to pass code!

(end quarky mini-rant about semantics)

Sometimes it works the other way. F1 has produced interesting developments that were the result of engineers trying to work around the rules. KERS became so good, that the rules had to be changed in response.

The Tour de France is about human effort, and opening up the definition of bikes would lead to it being a battle of technology. Drugs are now the problem instead, I suppose.

 

[quarky]

I believe you when you say that it was a "clear illustration to you", but it's just not the case for many. Over and over people see the treadmill videos and rather than understanding the mechanics of the vehicle, accuse us of cheating via fan or other.



All quite true if one assumes the GIANT "if" at the beginning of that paragraph. We have found that most folks, due to the flaws of intution, immediately reject the treadmill as equal.

JB

A slight nit-pik concerning the equivalence of the treadmill and the wind, especially because the ddw thing is so uber-important:

When wind, or flowing water, for that matter, meet resistance (or a load is attached) the direction of the flow is altered. Flow wants (excuse the anthropomorphizing of flow) to dodge such obstacles, in the easiest way it can. The treadmill's 'flow' is not effected by various attempts to exploit it. It remains rigidly ddw, straight north; to the left; whatever. Otherwise, its all good.

(This reminds me, slightly, of times I've spent on flowing rivers; intrigued by mini-whirlpools and eddies and such. Paddling up to them, in a canoe, for a closer look, inevitably caused them to shift position.)

 

[Subduction Zone]

humber, I see that you are continuing in your lying claim that the treadmill is dead. If so you should be able to pick up the simple yes/no answers to the questions I asked you. You remember, that was the one where you ran away when you would have to admit that the cart on the treadmill was the same as the cart on the road at the speed of the wind.

I just want you to remember that you aren't fooling anyone here, not even yourself.

 

[humber]

humber, I see that you are continuing in your lying claim that the treadmill is dead. If so you should be able to pick up the simple yes/no answers to the questions I asked you. You remember, that was the one where you ran away when you would have to admit that the cart on the treadmill was the same as the cart on the road at the speed of the wind.

I just want you to remember that you aren't fooling anyone here, not even yourself.

Nobody wants to accept the wager they threw about. It's money in the bank for me, because the cart says so.

 

[quarky]

Sometimes it works the other way. F1 has produced interesting developments that were the result of engineers trying to work around the rules. KERS became so good, that the rules had to be changed in response.

The Tour de France is about human effort, and opening up the definition of bikes would lead to it being a battle of technology. Drugs are now the problem instead, I suppose.

Might you have a chance to link me to F1 and KERS to which you refer? As mentioned, I've been away from this stuff for too long, and would like to catch up.
Funny, in a way, the tour de France, and its stodginess about bike definitions. Their lock down on the evolution of the mechanical technology did seem to squirt out sideways, via doping and such.
Pity is, even the performance enhancement cheating stuff has a legitimate value; perhaps not in that race...but certainly somewhere! What if the uber-jocks actually stumble on some good drugs? Wouldn't we do well to know something about that quest and its evolution, as opposed to simply locking it down in a cheap moral battle?

Interesting that pro-athletes are permitted to have performance enhancing surgeries; various improvements in tendon leverages for specific purposes; i.e., throwing a ball faster. it gets pretty silly. I say a pro ball player isn't allowed to wear contact lenses, much less have lasik surgery! Even wearing glasses should be cheating!

Its lamentable for our collective knowledge that there isn't a special division of the olympics, for instance, that allow all the cheating one can do to their own bodies for an advantage over the competition. much would be learned in the long run, essentially from the heroic sacrifices and courage of the cheaters. Of course, a lot of the drugs and all are potentially bad for the health of the athlete. Unlike the normal, legal punching in the head of moral boxers, and the high speed impacts of decent, non-cheating, 300 lb pro football players.

As you may guess, I have issues with morality, especially of the hypocritical, arbitrary and self-serving variety.

 

[humber]

Might you have a chance to link me to F1 and KERS to which you refer? As mentioned, I've been away from this stuff for too long, and would like to catch up.

All over the place Quarky. There are many technical articles to be found.
KERS store as much as 300KJ,in a tiny package. There are mechanical versions, and battery storage too. There are many views on the effect on the sport, such as this one. Google will readily lead you to more of both, and FISA's reaction to the successful failure.
http://www.smh.com.au/sport/motorsp...eturn-thrills-to-f1-jones-20110415-1dhsi.html

Funny, in a way, the tour de France, and its stodginess about bike definitions. Their lock down on the evolution of the mechanical technology did seem to squirt out sideways, via doping and such.
Pity is, even the performance enhancement cheating stuff has a legitimate value; perhaps not in that race...but certainly somewhere! What if the uber-jocks actually stumble on some good drugs? Wouldn't we do well to know something about that quest and its evolution, as opposed to simply locking it down in a cheap moral battle?

I suppose that depends if one is a purist or not. It is a moral battle when viewed that way, but then again, it can lead to athletes killing themselves to run a few tens of milliseconds faster. Oddly, for a very long time, the Olympic Committee did not take into account the time it takes for the sound of the starting pistol to reach the nearest and most distant runner. That is about 3ms per meter, so perhaps 30ms, and easily much larger than the margin between records.

There are natural cases of enhanced capacity. I think it was Lindford Christie, who's unique physiology meant he had twice the lung capacity normally found.

Interesting that pro-athletes are permitted to have performance enhancing surgeries; various improvements in tendon leverages for specific purposes; i.e., throwing a ball faster. it gets pretty silly. I say a pro ball player isn't allowed to wear contact lenses, much less have lasik surgery! Even wearing glasses should be cheating!
Its lamentable for our collective knowledge that there isn't a special division of the olympics, for instance, that allow all the cheating one can do to their own bodies for an advantage over the competition.

Good idea. Let 'em have at it. Their choice as it were, but do we really need to maximize everything? Hasten the time until the limit is reached?

much would be learned in the long run, essentially from the heroic sacrifices and courage of the cheaters. Of course, a lot of the drugs and all are potentially bad for the health of the athlete. Unlike the normal, legal punching in the head of moral boxers, and the high speed impacts of decent, non-cheating, 300 lb pro football players.
As you may guess, I have issues with morality, especially of the hypocritical, arbitrary and self-serving variety.

OK, but using one extreme to justify another is not so sound.
I have issues with the word "hypocrisy" .What can that usage mean, without having a self-serving moral viewpoint contra or not ? Drop the word "morality" and accept that we are self-serving one way or the other.
We seemed to have strayed slightly from the topic of the thread.

 

[Michael C]

@Michael: I will give an extensive reply to your last question directed to me on TR. Elements of it would be OT here.

Are you talking to me? I can't remember when I last asked you a question at TR, but I did ask you a question here at JREF just a couple of days ago: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7131747#post7131747. Are you interested in continuing the conversation about the angle of the wind? I don't see anything that would be OT about it.

 

[quarky]

Yeah, i thought the straying was sort-of indicated. Sort of an intermission to the reams of personal attack stuff. i get bored with that stuff quickly.
I find it interesting that we can be civil if I go off-topic enough.

Ok,

back to the wind and its lying, cheating, tornado spawning ways.

(thanks for the link, btw)

 

[spork]

A slight nit-pik concerning the equivalence of the treadmill and the wind, especially because the ddw thing is so uber-important:

When wind, or flowing water, for that matter, meet resistance (or a load is attached) the direction of the flow is altered. Flow wants (excuse the anthropomorphizing of flow) to dodge such obstacles, in the easiest way it can. The treadmill's 'flow' is not effected by various attempts to exploit it. It remains rigidly ddw, straight north; to the left; whatever.

Not so. The flow on a treadmill is affected exactly the same way by an obstacle as the flow of wind over the ground.

 

[humber]

Not so. The flow on a treadmill is affected exactly the same way by an obstacle as the flow of wind over the ground.

What ever "exactly" means when applied to something that is not in the least like a cart in the wind. But, you can be assured that the mass airflow generated by the belt, would be a tornado at full scale, and in the opposite direction.
The natural tailwind slows against the ground, with the velocity falling to zero at the surface whereas the belt accelerates the air towards the front of the cart and is at a maximum at the surface.

 

[quarky]

Not so. The flow on a treadmill is affected exactly the same way by an obstacle as the flow of wind over the ground.

I don't understand. Assuming the treadmill is bolted to a floor, doesn't it keep coming at you, in the exactly same direction, regardless of the activity on board? Its not likely to make sudden shifts in directional 'flow'.

 

[Modified]

I don't understand. Assuming the treadmill is bolted to a floor, doesn't it keep coming at you, in the exactly same direction, regardless of the activity on board? Its not likely to make sudden shifts in directional 'flow'.

He means the air is affected in the same way. The still air in a room will be disturbed by an object moving up the treadmill in the same way the wind is disturbed by an object on the ground.

 

[quarky]

ok

 

[A.T.]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVyuQchUdiE

You need more counterweight!

 

[A.T.]

Yes a link to Camps e-mail was posted several times. He now says that DDWFTTW doesn't necessarily violate any conservation laws.

I agree that's what he said in the email, a far cry from saying ddw.. was real.

Irrelevant. He says it doesn't violate physics. That was the point he was originally asked and wrong about.

Sounded to me like he thought this concession was the only way to get the Chief to stop calling.

Then read it again. He also explains why it doesn't violate physics.

 

[A.T.]

It's a joke played on internet wannabees.

Correct. It fools internet wannabees like you into arguing against it and demonstrate how clueless you are.

 

[humber]

Irrelevant. He says it doesn't violate physics. That was the point he was originally asked and wrong about.

No, he says that TM is invalid, in no uncertain terms, and what he said at Make has not been retracted, and the argument around the
molecular velocity stands as a reason why.

What you have is Spork's edited phone and emails with Dr Camp, not the actual words, or the questions that were put etc etc.....
Spork would not notice the inconsistencies that editing produced, and that explains why it is inconsistent and apparently contradictory.
So he is either lying to Make, or Sporky is at work, nagging the poor guy to death, until some apparent glimmer of hope is extracted.

 

[humber]

Correct. It fools internet wannabees like you into arguing against it and demonstrate how clueless you are.

Then I look forward to your coruscating analysis of the ideas contained, and rebuttal of what I said.
I should warn you that there are no sticks mentioned.
The note was written on New Year's Day, and Dr Drela has not completed it, nor followed up on it since.

 

[humber]

It's largely over Carteers. The TM is busted flat, the theory has no clothes, the NALSA data says the cart is nothing like a ddw cart, and I Ratant's video shows why.