Merged DDWFTTW in a “Real” Wind

[CORed]

We've tried that before with humber. It won't go anywhere. And don't point out that the earth is spinning, that won't help either. He seems to believe that the gravity of the earth creates a special reference frame.

I was never able to figure out exactly what humber believes. However, it is clear that the treadmill frightens and confuses (more than usual, I mean) humber. Perhaps he was traumatized as a child by an accident involving a treadmill.

 

[humber]

That's the real science you were telling us about - huh? The "science" the investors would insist on.

Yes. Why not?

I assure you it would not.

Short term wind patterns, exploited by selection. A longer run would average that out. You changed your claim from stead-state to whatever gained a result. You were aware of the wind an length of the run prior to the trial.
The Biggest Pizza record.

Interesting indeed - much like an empty potato chip bag.
I look forward to the journal article explaining the science behind that mystery.
I hope you're kidding. I thought your rigorous scientific testing just proved otherwise for you. Or do you want to just keep repeating the experiment until the cart decides to spontaneously go into the wind?

No problem. The cart will be blown downwind with the prop as a sail., just as I Ratant has claimed. Connecting the prop to the wheel, will allow it to move towards a fan, but much slower, because the force is geared up, so velocity falls. All upwind carts use that method.

You have by trial and error found a gear ratio that allows the cart to be blown downwind. The result is a slowly moving cart. The rest is explained by the wind changes.

 

[humber]

I was never able to figure out exactly what humber believes. However, it is clear that the treadmill frightens and confuses (more than usual, I mean) humber. Perhaps he was traumatized as a child by an accident involving a treadmill.

Silly frames of reference talk. Medieval in thought. "The ground drives the wheel because it is spinning"
The treadmill is a simple case of a regenerative momentum storage,
not The Music of The Heavens.
The first requires engineering and mathematical skill to understand, the latter: cartoons.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

...The rest is explained by the wind changes.

Only holds for very small values of "explained".

Can you actually explain how you think this "slow downwind cart" extracted sufficient energy from wind changes to achieve 2.8x windspeed?

 

[3point14]

Of course everything humber posts is either a lie or just plain wrong. But I'm pretty sure everyone here already knows that.

Can we do a poll?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Silly frames of reference talk. Medieval in thought. "The ground drives the wheel because it is spinning"
The treadmill is a simple case of a regenerative momentum storage,
not The Music of The Heavens.
The first requires engineering and mathematical skill to understand, the latter: cartoons.

This makes no real sense at all.

Is this an illustration of how any discussion of frames of reference appears to you?

 

[humber]

Only holds for very small values of "explained".

Can you actually explain how you think this "slow downwind cart" extracted sufficient energy from wind changes to achieve 2.8x windspeed?

And you think that big sail of a prop and the towers can't tack a 20 degree wind? The wind readings are way more than shown. Averaging is a beginner's error.
There are photos of the cart that won the last upwind trial, and the rotor is clearly geared down. Don't do that so much, and that cart will also be blown downwind.

 

[CORed]

And you think that big sail of a prop and the towers can't tack a 20 degree wind? The wind readings are way more than shown. Averaging is a beginner's error.
There are photos of the cart that won the last upwind trial, and the rotor is clearly geared down. Don't do that so much, and that cart will also be blown downwind.

With the right gearing in might even go downwind faster than the wind.

But then, of course, it would be a "failed upwind cart". Then again, maybe the upwind cart is actually a failed downwind cart.

 

[humber]

This makes no real sense at all.

Is this an illustration of how any discussion of frames of reference appears to you?

It has nothing to do with frames of reference. A boyish idea.
You can try it yourself. Take a sheet of paper, put a cotton reel on it, and pull the paper. If the reel spins, it more or less stays in place. So perhaps not "quite as fast as the wind" Is that right?

 

[EHocking]

When a tyre is on the road and does not slip, the tangential speed of the tyre at the surface, is the same as the road. That is, one meter or tyre, results in 1m of forward motion. The TM breaks that rule, and the only way it can do that is if it slips.

Rubbish. You have no evidence that the tyres are slipping on the treadmill - you are only hanging on to that escape as the only explanation that doesn't encompass realising that the cart works as designed.

 

[EHocking]

It has nothing to do with frames of reference.

It has ALL to do with frames of reference. Vis

A boyish idea.
You can try it yourself. Take a sheet of paper, put a cotton reel on it, and pull the paper. If the reel spins, it more or less stays in place.

But moves, relative to a point of reference on the paper, in the opposite direction to that which the paper is pulled.

So perhaps not "quite as fast as the wind" Is that right?

No.

 

[A.T.]

And you think that big sail of a prop and the towers can't tack a 20 degree wind?

Yeah, how can you still not believe humber, after he explained you with vectors how the pylons are"propelling" the cart:

 

[humber]

Rubbish. You have no evidence that the tyres are slipping on the treadmill - you are only hanging on to that escape as the only explanation that doesn't encompass realising that the cart works as designed.

Afraid not. If a real cart is moving at 10m/s, after one second it will travel 10m.
That is 10m of road will pass by. Same for 11m/s etc.
On the belt set at 10m/s the belt moves 10m, but the ">WS cart moves say 10.1m. The video shows a cart moving at 0.1m/s ( the visible motion) while the belt moves at 4m/s. So the cart "moves" 4.1m as 4m of ground passes by.

 

[CORed]

And you think that big sail of a prop and the towers can't tack a 20 degree wind? The wind readings are way more than shown. Averaging is a beginner's error.
There are photos of the cart that won the last upwind trial, and the rotor is clearly geared down. Don't do that so much, and that cart will also be blown downwind.

So you cite "tacking" (or more correctly sailing in a broad reach) by the whole prop or the support towers (lol) as an explanation for the cart moving downwind faster than the wind, but you refuse to accept the blades of the prop doing the same as an explanation for the cart going directly downwind faster than the wind?

 

[humber]

Yeah, how can you still not believe humber, after he explained you with vectors how the pylons are"propelling" the cart:

[qimg]http://talkrational.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=2912&stc=1&d=1296766116[/qimg]

I gave you some homework on that. Solve the Taylor power series implied by Newton's impact theory. Then get back to me.

 

[A.T.]

So you cite "tacking" (or more correctly sailing in a broad reach) by the whole prop or the support towers (lol) as an explanation for the cart moving downwind faster than the wind, but you refuse to accept the blades of the prop doing the same as an explanation for the cart going directly downwind faster than the wind?

Oh, I'm sure humber will soon produce a text-book reference saying that "towers can tack". And that "propellers gain efficiency through cross wind".

 

[humber]

So you cite "tacking" (or more correctly sailing in a broad reach) by the whole prop or the support towers (lol) as an explanation for the cart moving downwind faster than the wind, but you refuse to accept the blades of the prop doing the same as an explanation for the cart going directly downwind faster than the wind?

I Ratant has demonstrated that a turning rotor can make a sail.
Known for a long time. When Spork mines for failed and antediluvian ideas, he leaves so much behind.

 

[A.T.]

I gave you some homework on that.

No more work needed on that. It says everything there is to say. Well done humber.

 

[jduffy77]

Afraid not. If a real cart is moving at 10m/s, after one second it will travel 10m.
That is 10m of road will pass by. Same for 11m/s etc.
On the belt set at 10m/s the belt moves 10m, but the ">WS cart moves say 10.1m. The video shows a cart moving at 0.1m/s ( the visible motion) while the belt moves at 4m/s. So the cart "moves" 4.1m as 4m of ground passes by.

Come on Humber, even for you this is moronic. The exact same distance over the ground/belt is traveled by the cart on the belt and the cart on the TM.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

And you think that big sail of a prop and the towers can't tack a 20 degree wind?

I think the lateral movement of the prop blades means they can tack a zero degree wind. (From their frame of reference, of course, it isn't a zero degree wind.)

I think the towers provide no power to the cart.