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

[RossFW]

Managed an 80 on the NSW test. Actually better than I did on it in 1982!!!

NO CLUE any more about conventions when it comes to current flow, and they teach kids about Photo-voltaics these days, WAY beyond me!!

Yes John, Humbers response just floored me. Thing is, every now and then there's just that little glimmer. He actually analyses virtually identical scenarios correctly (Kite on a treadmill for an EG) then just come out with the most outragous howlers!! (How long do two cars have zero KE as they pass each other????? WTF???)


Humber, some interesting questions in both those quizzes. I actually think you'll do better than me with the electical flow and magnetic questions. The fact that you won't even understand, let alone correctly answer some of the motion questions should tell you something.

Though it will probably tell you the NSW education department doesn't know how physics works in the Humberverse!!!

 

[John Freestone]

No object can sustain zero KE, without permanently staying at the same velocity.

Whoever decides to compile the Principia Humbermatica is going to have a hard time making all the laws fit together.

 

[Christian Klippel]

Whoever decides to compile the Principia Humbermatica is going to have a hard time making all the laws fit together.

Hi John,

surely it will come with detailed instructions as to what page to look up for a specific term at what time of the day. So you get the result you need in the morning, while in the evening, you get another one. Simple as that.

But i would prefer an electronic edition. Just put all the humberisms in a text file, and a random number generator will choose one for you, slightly depending on context, but not too much.

Greetings,

Chris

Edit: Heck, i should put the humberisms in my motd file, so i always get a good laugh when i log in to my shell.

 

[jjcote]

We went over this one in the original DDWFTTW thread, so I can confidently predict that his answer will be something along the lines of:

It's the history of the object that's important.

That's easy. The one with with the booster will be accelerated, so that is the one that is moving.
Backwards is jut an illusion of the observer.That's too complicated to explain, but there is another way.
The acceleration history is not recorded by the instrument, but by the object itself. It has to be somewhere, at some velocity, and that history puts it where it is.
It's a chain that is the sum of all the things that have ever happened to it.
The accelerometer can tell the human operator what is happening now, thing 'next' thing in the chain, but mostly, objects don't care.
I don't know why you worry so much about where things "really" are.

Oh really?
One spaceship was built on Earth, the other on a planet orbiting Vega. They meet in interstellar space and they aren't moving relative to each other. Each still thinks that it's moving relative to its home planet, though. One fires its boosters. Is it now moving forward, or was it backing up before and now it has slowed down? How can you tell the difference? You can have all the history information you want.

 

[John Freestone]

(He didn't ask for some Adiabatic on his Burger, he knew it had SOMETHING to do with air). ... you don't find Tiger Moths with compressibility problems!!

See it's worth it just for these gems.

Thirdly, from his writing I would assume that English is not his first language. There is a certain brusqueness and syntax that suggest to me a language background in one of the harsher sounding ones.

Didn't he say he was Dutch? I think so. Or am I thinking of Denmark? There was some bragging about how every boy in Whereveritwas grows up playing with windcarts; it's the tradition, and he even remembered having one. I think it was Dutch. Netherlands. But since he is twice as clever as every other little Dutch boy, his first language was, er, let me see...Double Dutch.

Culture is a well documented factor in many air accidents where a proud pilot, culturally pre-disposed to not admitting error, will press on with an eventually disastrous course of action rather than admit error, and with those around him remaining silent so as not to "dis-honour him" by saving their own lives!!

Cheers, I was just working up to getting over my flying phobia.

 

[humber]

I'm sure I'm not the only one getting a guilty pleasure out of this. I think we are all beyond hoping Humber will admit his errors and basic mis-conceptions and are just throwing out questions to see exactly how dumb his answers will be -I know I have (Identify the Python reference!!)

Oooh, go on then, just the one...
The explicit Python references, perhaps.

I don't think it's beyond the pale, therefore, to see if we can't infer a little about the mind that is the Humber form the data we have.

Doctor, is there any hope for Little Nell?

First up, we are not talking about someone with an extensive education. I can't believe that anyone with any higher learning, even if it were in non-technical fields, would lack the simple abilities at mental modeling and VERY basic physics to be able to make such fundamental errors.

As a Flat Earther, I'm the smart one of my family.

Secondly, he knows a lot of big words and ALMOST knows what SOME of them mean (He didn't ask for some Adiabatic on his Burger, he knew it had SOMETHING to do with air).

Wittgenstein: Where (or of what) one cannot speak, one must pass over in silence.

Though germane advice, he did not mean that you should shut up if you do not know what you are talking about, but (generally), that if we do not have the words to express it we cannot think it, let alone communicate it.
Maybe that is the problem that you have with my writing and word usage.
Small dic tionary, perhaps.

I should add that I argue with you, using your mental tools, not mine.
If that were no the case, I would not still be doing so, RossFW.

He thinks if he bandies them about, it infers knowledge (e.g, when I asked a simple question about True Airspeed vs Ground Speed he through out Mach No. (For the record, we were talking about 100mph- so about M0.13 at sea level- you don't find Tiger Moths with compressibility problems!!) but drops them quickly enough when asked to explain their relevance.

You were not specific. I found it difficult to believe that you has set me the Herculean task of adding 100 to 100, or whatever it was.

Thirdly, from his writing I would assume that English is not his first language. There is a certain brusqueness and syntax that suggest to me a language background in one of the harsher sounding ones.

Three, and I like brevity.

I have lived in a few different parts of the world and travel globally. If there is one thing I have learned it is that, PC or no PC, there ARE cultural norms that shape behavior and attitudes in people from different places.

Good on ya', mate! Me love you long time.
Did you visit the Reeperbahn when in Hamburg? Why not?

In many cultures, it is VERY hard for people, particularly Males, to admit error or even lack of knowledge of a subject.

Culture? This thread?

Culture is a well documented factor in many air accidents where a proud pilot, culturally pre-disposed to not admitting error, will press on with an eventually disastrous course of action rather than admit error, and with those around him remaining silent so as not to "dis-honour him" by saving their own lives!!

That is true. Actually it is quite alarming. An airbus passenger plane nearly crashed after the (non-Japanese) captain not only ruled over advice, but was completely illogical, falling for the gambler's paradox, and so draining all the fuel from the tanks after pumping it into the leaking tank. They fortunately made a record glide, to land the plane to a hero's welcome.
He took it well.

"On 24 August 2001, Air Transat, Flight 236, an A330-243, performed the world's longest recorded glide with a jet airliner after suffering fuel exhaustion over the Atlantic Ocean. The plane flew powerless for half an hour and covered 65 nautical miles (120 km) to an emergency landing in the Azores (Portugal). No one was hurt, but the aircraft suffered some structural damage and blown tires"

These people react VERY badly when error is pointed out to them (I used to fly in Japan, and have some first hand experience of this!!)

Yes, don't they, Captain.

So my read on this?

The judgment. Drum roll....

Humber is a rudimentally educated person, later trained in a technical trade (I'm thinking electrician) with a keen interest in Physics, but without the basic grounding to comprehend basic concepts. He is originally from a hierarchical, male dominated culture, and is not used to those around him contradicting or correcting him (Plus, I don't think he HAS many people around him!) and gets very cross when anyone does.

Any thoughts?

I am the Chief of a very proud people. You insult my heritage. You may no longer have my daughter's hand in marriage.

The word buffoon, comes to mind. All that from someone who thinks apparent velocity, is real velocity, and slower cars go backwards. Why do cars have reverse gear selection?

Can you now please answer at least some of the questions that I posted.?

 

[spork]

Whoever decides to compile the Principia Humbermatica is going to have a hard time making all the laws fit together.

Did you mean to say "laws" or "flaws"?

I find it interesting and surprising that humber has chosen not to comment on the state of mind that makes his postings possible. I wonder if it's not possible from his perspective?

 

[John Freestone]

We went over this one in the original DDWFTTW thread, so I can confidently predict that his answer will be something along the lines of:

It's the history of the object that's important.

How right you were. I guess that's why he can't tell me which direction the wind moves relative to my little man on a treadmill. It must depend where each molecule has been throughout its entire history. We can't discern the velocity of anything with a mere instrument, we have to ask the object where it was created and what has happened to it since.

 

[Christian Klippel]

I think it was Dutch. Netherlands. But since he is twice as clever as every other little Dutch boy, his first language was, er, let me see...Double Dutch.

Hello John,

Yes, it was. One little detail about the Netherlands: they have coffee-shops were people can buy weed and dope legally. Maybe he sits there all day long, maybe at the counter even. That actually might explain some things....

Greetings,

Chris

 

[John Freestone]

Hi John,

surely it will come with detailed instructions as to what page to look up for a specific term at what time of the day. So you get the result you need in the morning, while in the evening, you get another one. Simple as that.

But i would prefer an electronic edition. Just put all the humberisms in a text file, and a random number generator will choose one for you, slightly depending on context, but not too much.

Greetings,

Chris

Edit: Heck, i should put the humberisms in my motd file, so i always get a good laugh when i log in to my shell.

I'm so glad someone more organised than me is keeping track of this train wreck for the future. It certainly would make a great little website, as I think you suggested originally. I was a bit off about moving humberverse out of the thread then. It felt a bit cruel to export it and expose his ignorance. But the more he goes on with his offence to common rules of discussion, lies and cheats and moves goalposts just to avoid seeming to give up or apologise, the more I think hell yeah.

Hello John,

Yes, it was. One little detail about the Netherlands: they have coffee-shops were people can buy weed and dope legally. Maybe he sits there all day long, maybe at the counter even. That actually might explain some things....

Greetings,

Chris

Ah....oh......... I'd forgotten that connection. I went to Amsterdam for a weekend, and I can't say that I did any of my 'best work' there! And there is all this about having to move from computer to computer. Maybe you're right. Maybe he spends all his time sitting in coffee shops smoking hash and "discussing physics with some people, man", if any chicks ask, until he gets chucked out for trying to make hot-air balloons out of paper napkins and setting the place on fire. That's it. He's wasted. Good detective work, Chris. Case closed.

 

[Dan O.]

I've found some physics tests on the internet that we can try.

Intuitor Physics Savvy Quiz

I discovered I had misread one of the other questions.

I tried that quize about a year ago and again last month. I misread that same question both times. Must be a 1 in a 1000 thing.

And if anyone can figure out how to get Humber to take them and accurately report his results, I can't wait to hear it.

You used "accurately" and "Humber" in the same sentence.

(oops, so did I)​

 

[H'ethetheth]

But which reference frame,H'ethetheth? Do you say that the belt implies motion for the car, and/or is that is true only from the belt?

it implies motion of the car yes if we look at it from the belt. Just like from every other reference frame that is not stationary with respect to the car.

That the car can be actually said to be traveling in some way?

Yes. In the same way the the fish in the fish wheel can be said to be travelling, and in the same way that you can be said to be travelling at any given time.

The air under the cart comes mainly from the fan, the belt modifies that, or perhaps it can be considered as the supposition of the belt-generated flow, and that coming from the fan.
I did not say the array produced vertical jets; it can be directed. There are grid patterns that could even 'focus' the array.

But if it's a horizontal array it does necessaily imply vertical jets.

If I had another set in front of a car that is going into the headwind, I could pre-condition that coming 'boundary layer', to make up for possible limitations of the set under the car. This system has some advantages because it is prescient, allowing the system to 'anticipate' the future and so gain better control. Perhaps it could even mimic braking or cornering down force by changing the pattern under the car in real-time.

I admit that this is theoretically possible, however, it is practically orders of magnitude more complicated than current computers can handle, due to the nature of turbulence.

I did say that. That it was a matter of convenience and cost. Belts work, but it is not the only way, so the same tunnel could be built without a belt. The wheels may spin or not.

It is practically the only way, and there will never probably never be a necessity to solve this differently. By the time people can generate arbitrary turbulent velocity fields at will, the can use that same computing power to just solve their problem by CFD.

The differences are paramount. If you consider the treadmill, the only independently active component is the belt.

No, considering only the treadmill for a moment. on the DDWFTTW cart all components are active, and interact in the same ways as on the road. The air moves across the propeller blades the same way, the wheels move the same way relative to the surface, the air moves the same way relative to the surface.

The fish tank is different, very true, but like the treadmill, it keeps the object of study in one place, while keeping all interactions with the environment as close to identical as possible.

There are several possibilities for the fish tank. I think the most likely is that the fish swims in contra-rotation to the water channel. One gate act as a paddle and the other opens so the fish can pass, and this process generates a flow over the fish so it swims against it (upstream). The camera can track the fish by operator (feedback) control. Flow could be controlled by partially opening the gates.

On the other hand the channel could go with the fish, so stimulating it forward.

The most banal is that the fish swims in still water (w.r.t itself), and the device rotates in the opposite direction so it can be filmed. It's rather like a stroboscope in that case.

The fish swims in still water with respect to itself? That's not swimming.
It could be that you actually intended to say the right thing though, so I'll give you the answer.
The fish wheel is intended to model still water. It does this by creating a uniform flow field as well as it can. My version is intended to enable measurement of the vortices in the wake of small fish, so any vortices typical of flowing water would severely influence the measurement. These vorrtices are absent in still water, but following a fish through a tank with a camera is not easy, so you want to create moving still water for the fish to swim through while stationary remaining with respect to the camera.

A car driven by it's own engine is in a different class from that driven by the belt, for example.

True, but not important if the interactions of all parts reamin the same.

The point I am seeking, H'ethetheth, is that the treadmill has taken the process too far by removal of the wind, and so only bears comparison on that basis. This rules out Bainbridge's device.

But the treadmill does not remove the wind! It preserves the interaction of air and surface, and the interaction of the air and the cart!

You seem to disagree upon the basis of the belt implies motion, or relative motion.
(BMW using the car and belt without wind)

It does not imply motion. It moves.

I raised the 'static boundary layer generator' to show that belt motion was not necessary to the effect, and it would be hard to argue at all for motion (or equivalent motion ) without that belt motion.

Let's forget about that, shall we. It confuses matters, and it won't be feasible until holodeck technology is hum-drum.

Furthermore, in the BMW case I think the correct boundary will not be reproduced unless the wind coming under the car from the fan is included.

For a large enough treadmill, the interactions between wheels, air, chassis, and surface will become indistinguishable from a car on a road. On the road, ther is no wind coming from under the car. The only thing that can happen is that the wheels and airfoils create vertical velocities, but they will never induce vertical velocities at the surface.

 

[John Freestone]

Thanks for those tests, Brian. I got

Intuitor Physics Savvy Quiz

The first one is really good, if somewhat tricky. I managed to get 87.5%, even though when I looked over my mistakes I discovered I'd accidently marked one box false when I meant true, and I discovered I had misread one of the other questions.

85%. Yeah, some of that trickiness is that terms are sometimes technically used and sometimes colloquially, but it is quite fun. My knowledge of energy, work, heat, etc. are a bit off, but I'm fairly happy with that.

High School Certificate - Physics Exam Questions

The second one is put out by the New South Wales board of studies, which generates a random quiz using real exam questions from previous exams for self testing purposes. It's not a full exam, or even close to being a full exam, just 15 multple choice questions. I don't think we can use this one as a standard, because everyone will get different questions, but it's a good challenge.

I went to High School in New South Wales (that's not why I picked the quiz, Google just happened to bring it up), and I'm not sure if the questions have gotten harder or if I've forgotten too much. I still managed to get 73.3%, which is better than I did in the full exam 13 years ago.

So if anyone wants to have a go, be my guest.

And if anyone can figure out how to get Humber to take them and accurately report his results, I can't wait to hear it.

Oh dear, only 46.7% for me on those 15 questions. You can choose more, or fewer, questions, and it looks like they're randomly chosen. The subjects are a lot wider. I've no idea about some of the things I was asked, like how superconductors behave with temperature (I mean, I know vaguely, I can't draw a bleedin' graph!). Some of it needed very specific formulas, which, if I ever knew, I've forgotten a long time ago. Oh well, it was more productive than arguing with humber.

 

[RossFW]

Dutch? Yep! That'll do it!

Worst aircraft accident in history was caused by a Dutch Captain who wouldn't listen when his First Officer told him he wasn't cleared for take off.

700ish people dead 'cause he was right and everyone else was wrong.....

 

[John Freestone]

Folks, i have to repeat this humber-statement, because it is really telling:

I don't know why you worry so much about where things "really" are.

Ah, but imagine him saying it in a Dutch accent, bleary eyes all screwed up in the half-light, a pile of spliff roaches in the ashtray...outside a tram clanks past in the street...

Now it makes more sense.

 

[John Freestone]

Did you mean to say "laws" or "flaws"?

Ah, yes, it's the Flaws of Humbernature.

The depth of crazy-levels in this one is amazing, the nested nuttery: "No object can sustain zero KE, without permanently staying at the same velocity."

Permanently? What, forever? Not only does he not have the knowledge or mental clarity to say "zero KE depends on zero acceleration", which is false anyway, but somehow it depends on it staying at the same velocity permanently! Nothing has zero KE. It has accelerated, or might accelerate at some point in the future.

Of course, he also didn't shorten "stays at the same velocity" to "doesn't accelerate", since they don't equate in humberverse. I think my version is much neater, but I'm worried it may have lost some of the incorrectness of the original.

Is it KE = m*a_permanent?

 

[John Freestone]

Dutch? Yep! That'll do it!

Worst aircraft accident in history was caused by a Dutch Captain who wouldn't listen when his First Officer told him he wasn't cleared for take off.

700ish people dead 'cause he was right and everyone else was wrong.....

No, you're not making it any easier. Thankfully, I'm not planning on flying to Holland.

We should interrupt this merry banter, to show respect for the unfortunate 700ish.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Enough?

What was it, some Dutch kid with his bloody windcart again? Damn that tradition, those things are a nightmare.

 

[H'ethetheth]

Yes yes, enough ripping on the Dutch already!

 

[spacediver]

82.5% on the first one

 

[H'ethetheth]

82.5% on the first one

I got 97.5 on the first one, but an embarrassing 60% on the second. Electricity and magnetism have quite clearly fallen over the edge of my brain at some point.