Merged DDWFTTW in a “Real” Wind

[Myriad]

Yeah, but he's gonna build his own cart and conduct his own experiments to prove you wrong and he'll film it so the whole world can see his victory. You'll see!

Any day now...

Well, it's easy enough to build a cart that doesn't go downwind faster than the wind. Just as it's easy to build a vehicle that doesn't fly, or doesn't float on water. In fact, one single vehicle, properly designed with e.g. no prop, no wheels, no wings, and no enclosed hull would fail to do all three of those things! But would still prove nothing about the possibility of doing them.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[spork]

Well, it's easy enough to build a cart that doesn't go downwind faster than the wind. Just as it's easy to build a vehicle that doesn't fly, or doesn't float on water. In fact, one single vehicle, properly designed with e.g. no prop, no wheels, no wings, and no enclosed hull would fail to do all three of those things! But would still prove nothing about the possibility of doing them.

Respectfully,
Myriad

But humber claims to have a prop-less cart that does advance on a treadmill. He's waiting for just the right moment to spring this on us.

 

[Llyricist]

Tsk - only an idiot would do it without a fluid-flywheel clutch coupling in a fully-damped flexible housing...

D'oh! How could I forget!

 

[humber]

You have so many ways to be wrong. 100m sprinters hit peak speed at about 60m and then slow gradually. They worry about every millisecond because there's so little time to make up for errors like a slight hesitation at the start or a scraped foot coming out of the blocks.

The main point being that if a sprinter were allowed to start on a short downhill - and then hit the flat - it would not add to their maximum speed, it would merely improve their average speed.

For linear acceleration v=at, but the average speed over t is v/2, but for
for constant velocity, the average is v.

So, obviously, the time spend accelerating influences the peak but non-constant speed, unless a = 0, and it does not.

 

[humber]

It won't make any difference to the TM cart, with no prop. Your posse will not help you. I have two and they will be mark the end of that nonsense.

But, the TM does not have anything to do with the record, which you are hawking as valid.

Ivanpah is popular with wind surfers, because of the wind conditions there.
Long and detailed records, available to you as well as to me, show that Ivanpah is totally unsuitable for ddw testing because of the variable conditions and wind sheer over the flat terrain, yet you knew that, but went ahead.

The earlier informal tests, also told you that the test run would never be long enough for your cart to reach steady-state, yet again, you went ahead with the trial.

Would you like to explain why you did that, Spork?

 

[Llyricist]

The informal tests were performed at Ivanpah, the record was at El Mirage.

 

[Llyricist]

And like most technical terms you throw around, you don't understand what steady state means.

 

[D'rok]

It won't make any difference to the TM cart, with no prop. Your posse will not help you. I have two and they will be mark the end of that nonsense.

Let's see them.

 

[humber]

But humber claims to have a prop-less cart that does advance on a treadmill. He's waiting for just the right moment to spring this on us.

This Dutch amatuer beat you to your prop cart by several years. It is not a turbine, and the text say so. He makes the same claim for a prop cart, as you do, but well before you.

His small TM is no less valid than yours. He uses a stop off the belt and shows that the thrust can overcome that. You did the same in your video "Physics on a Shoestring" , where you tied the cart to the frame. If that is valid proof that the prop generated more thrust that drag from the belt, then so is his. What is it that you think you have to say? Even down to the last detail, it has all been done before.


http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/7690/u56.mp4

http://img864.imageshack.us/img864/5312/i0i.mp4

 

[D'rok]

This Dutch amatuer beat you to your prop cart by several years. It is not a turbine, and the text say so. He makes the same claim for a prop cart, as you do, but well before you.

His small TM is no less valid than yours. He uses a stop off the belt and shows that the thrust can overcome that. You did the same in your video "Physics on a Shoestring" , where you tied the cart to the frame. If that is valid proof that the prop generated more thrust that drag from the belt, then so is his. What is it that you think you have to say? Even down to the last detail, it has all been done before.


http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/7690/u56.mp4

http://img864.imageshack.us/img864/5312/i0i.mp4

Spork et al never claimed to be first.

Just what about those videos is supposed to refute anything about Spork's cart?

 

[humber]

Let's see them.

When it pleases me. The record is first. The TM can be talked around. Some loss of face perhaps, but the trial is "official".
Your taunting denial shows that you do not, and have not understood the TM.
I have the security of that understanding and the physical results, so you can bark at the gate, and wait.

 

[D'rok]

When it pleases me. The record is first. The TM can be talked around. Some loss of face perhaps, but the trial is "official".
Your taunting denial shows that you do not, and have not understood the TM.
I have the security of that understanding and the physical results, so you can bark at the gate, and wait.

Put up or shut up.

 

[humber]

Spork et al never claimed to be first.

Just what about those videos is supposed to refute anything about Spork's cart?

It says he copied everything, not just Bauer.

He and Bungles claim that the TM is an *instance* of a cart in the wind. A transform, where the belt is the road, and the motion of the cart is relative to that surface. Proof of a cart in the wind.

But, I said that is it nothing more than a prop driven by a belt, and nothing at all to do with Galilean Equivalence. I said much earlier, that anything that turns the wheels would work. Indeed, a belt sander does just that, and that is what that is. The "road" is sandpaper.

 

[humber]

Put up or shut up.

I'll raise that.
Just shut up.
Better still. Ignore. I want to get on with the matter of the wind. That is best done without windbags.

 

[CORed]

Let's see them.

Yes, and detailed instructions on how to replicate your results, just like spork and TAD provided for the propeller carts tested on treadmills.

 

[D'rok]

It says he copied everything, not just Bauer.

This video does not show that. But so what if he did? He got off his ass and conclusively demonstrated a physics brain-teaser through clever engineering, all the way from simple cart tests on a treadmill to a full-scale vehicle. Props! (No pun intended).

He and Bungles claim that the TM is an *instance* of a cart in the wind. A transform, where the belt is the road, and the motion of the cart is relative to that surface. Proof of a cart in the wind.

And they are exactly right. It doesn't matter whether the belt/road moves under the cart or whether the cart moves over the belt/road. Same difference.

But, I said that is it nothing more than a prop driven by a belt, and nothing at all to do with Galilean Equivalence. I said much earlier, that anything that turns the wheels would work. Indeed, a belt sander does just that, and that is what that is. The "road" is sandpaper.

The only difference is that no one is wielding a spork to keep the cart on the belt sander. Both videos confirm Spork's results.

 

[D'rok]

I'll raise that.
Just shut up.
Better still. Ignore. I want to get on with the matter of the wind. That is best done without windbags.

Let's see your carts. Put your money where your gigantic mouth is. Insults only emphasize your failure and cowardice.

 

[humber]

I am waiting for Spork to tell me why he tested the cart under conditions that he knew would not be suitable for ddw, nor proof of steady-state.

He made preliminary tests, that left no doubt.
Records show that Ivanpah is never suited to that task.

 

[D'rok]

I am waiting for Spork to tell me why he tested the cart under conditions that he knew would not be suitable for ddw, nor proof of steady-state.

And then you'll unveil your carts?

How convenient. Since Spork did neither of those things, you will be waiting forever.

 

[CORed]

It is pretty clear that there is no test that will satisfy humber that the propeller carts work as advertised. He will always invent another reason that the test is invalid, just like a birther denying every piece of evidence that Obama was born in the US.

What makes it really amazing is that he seems to accept that a sail tacking (or more correctly, on a broad reach) can achieve velocity made good faster than the wind, but can' accept that a propeller blade will do the same thing.

Very likely, humber realizes now that he is completely wrong, but but is pathologically incapable of admitting it. Sad.