humber the reason that physicists use frames of reference is so that they can eliminate distractions (which means the first thing to go in any real physics lab would be you).
A lukewarm recanting of my point. I am conciliatory right now, but I could do a 10 minute stand-up on that last remark.
It allows them to focus on the problem at hand. Your not understanding what an inertial reference frame is led to people proposing what seemed to you excessive limitations. But that is only because you wanted to cheat and not play the game fairly.
It's not "cheating" SZ, it's a flaw. It is the premise of the treadmill test. The treadmill
and cart are the isolation box itself. I can turn your hobo game into a maelstrom of ideas that you have not even guessed at.
You are trying to change the deck chairs on the Titanic. Do you think I just pulled that one out of my hat? I thought of the orange/propellor thing at the time I mentioned it, but I though that it was perhaps a little cruel to some. So, I took the longer route, only to end up doing it anyway, because some refuse to take yes
or no for an answer.
I will try again to explain how the belt is the same as moving at wind speed with the wind when you are stationary relative to the floor. If you stood still on the treadmill you would feel a "wind" (spork and J.B. approved) on your back as you faced the front of the treadmill.
I hope you can agree to this, if not the whole thing is hopeless. So moving at the speed of the treadmill (relative to the treadmill) is the same as if you were outside moving with the wind at the speed of the wind, you would feel no wind in either case.
No. What allows relative motion between two connected objects? Friction.
The velocity develops
across the friction of the interface. Without contact with the belt, there is no "wind" for an object on the belt.
The wind, is dependent upon that friction. When the cart is held, the force is such that that "beltspeed" develops across the interface. Later, at "windspeed" the force is so low, that the differential velocity across the friction is near zero.
This is
something likethe behavior of "the meteorological balloon" but then again, a balloon does not have wheels. Differences abound.
I am sorry, but you do not have a "frame of reference" here. It is a little "relative equivalence" mixed with "upsidedownism". The model is wrongly constructed. The belt may be the road or the wind, but it cannot be the road
and the
power for the wind. That error is what
causes the wind to be dependent the friction to the belt.
The cart was originally held on the treadmill that is the equivalent of someone who is in a moving car outside moving with the wind holding the cart on the ground until the wheels are spinning.
No, it should be the equivalent of no wheel spin, don't you think?
When the cart is first put down there is SOME wheel slippage until the cart is up to speed, but once it is up to speed there will be no slipping of the wheels. It may seem to be cheating to start the cart at windspeed, which is what they are doing whether on the treadmill inside or using a moving car on the outside.
But everyone agrees that you could get close to the seed of a tailwind, the controversial part was crossing over faster than the wind.
Yes, as I have said. It's the "last bit", and the bit between standstill and windspeed, that makes all the difference isn't it? Moreover, the treadmill does not do that in the way you think it does.
So spork and JB developed the treadmill to test that crucial cross over point. The videos that show the cart advancing shows that it is crossing this critical point (note it is only critical for the argument, the cart does not really care if it is going a little bit slower than the wind or faster than the wind, it still has quite a bit of acceleration left for it).
No, really. That's nonsense.
Inertial frames of reference allow experimenters to close the door on unwanted noise and let you test just one aspect of a system. Just like you might want to close the door on a room of someone listening too music while you are in another room watching a show. Your show will still go on regardless but you will be able to understand it better if you don't have to hear your roommate play "We are the Champions" by Queen at full blats.
It amazes me. You still think you can tell me about frames of reference. Why?
Do you think the idea to be so abstracted that I cannot understand it?
No,
you do not understand. You
cannot "close the door" on acceleration. That is not the point, but simply a fact.
However, the "boxcar" is falsely used to justify observation of the cart through the tiny peephole of "windspeed" that remains.
I like Bohemian Rhapsody "Galileo, Galileo..."
Thanks, I actually LOLed.
