As a lot of people have already commented on, this particular thread has been a study in humber's evasions and counter(rotating!) arguments. His latest is of special interest to me, that of the tire that doesn't move unless it is smaller than it used to be. An interesting concept but one that only exists in humber's mind, and then likely only as an attempt to explain away the picture of "Dyno" Don's Maverick launching on wrinkle wall slicks. Hard to continue denying a picture with the current line of garbage about contact patch when the picture clearly showed differently.
I have plenty of supporting references, Mender. The more you bluster and deny, the more potent they become.
Only a fool accepts photos as irrefutable evidence. (Actually it supports my case, and not yours, but I prefer better evidence)
Even after the obvious farce of the jeep on the hill, you persist.
So now we have another attempt at a convoluted line of reasoning about the tire needing to be "shorter" rather than admitting that any decrease in diameter is because of increased load from weight transfer - which of course humber was going to use in his next argument but with some weird twist that would invalidate the concept.
Standard engineering. The description is figurative, but the principle is correct.
Put down "Hot Wheels" and pick up a text book.
This is an insight into what humber has been doing through most of the two threads, taking a position and defending it (or avoiding defending it) through whatever devious methods he can. It appears that he lost his script in the last few days, because he's really starting to contradict himself. Until now he has been fairly consistent. I think he needs some sleep.
No, you have been working on the assumption that you are right, and so taken a light-hearted condescending attitude. I am simply calling you out on your knowledge. You can't sell "frames of reference" flim-flam in this case. It has left Spork speechless.
Let's see how humber parses this: if one tire is fully inflated and an identical tire is only partially inflated so that the height of the supporting axles are different (the partially inflated tire's axle having less height from the ground),
Straight off the bat error. Tyre inflation is not the issue. It is generally true that the load does not change the tyre pressure, but that is not the case for a rolling wheel. There are
local pressure changes at the point of
deflection, for example. If you make your world out of simplified objects, you get a simple world. However, it is those "little things" that make the difference between the ideal and the real. Tyres do work, they get hot.
A truly ideal wheel, cannot be driven forward in rotation by its axis. That is a fact.
..will the partially inflated tire rotate faster when both tires are moving over the ground at the same ground speed? Will the torque that the tire transfers from the axle to the contact patch on the ground be altered in any way by the difference in tire height?
Utterly misconstrued and irrelevant. An inane question, designed to ensure a suitably vague outcome couched in your favour.
Now, that is certainly your M.O., Mender.
Still afraid to answer any questions.