Split Thread The validity of classical physics (split from: DWFTTW)
- Thread starter Dan O.
- Start date
- Status
But nothing else.
I insist that you cannot hold your ground without recourse to evasion and strawmen.
No, the power falls and the demand rises. When they are the same, that is the maximum velocity. Around 50% on that graph. Where the lines intersect, as I have said. The same goes for the force.
No need semper. The absolute value is not necessary. If calculated, it would still not do anything for you. You are evading an obvious point.
Since you can't use Matlab, or encourage someone else to do it, I feel no need to heed your demand, even if it were relevant.
ETA:
Want the skater to be a sled? Go ahead. But do show how you deny the result.
Last edited:
You seem to know that, but where is your support for your claims?
Don't forget RossFW, that Humber is merely talking about a balloon or parachute dragging a sled in wind. We don't really know why he is so keen on that.
We are not interested in the absolute value here Humber, just the equation.
Although I can use Matlab, I don't think I need to in order to find an equation for the power input to the wheel. You can if you like.
Then use any equations you like. It won't matter.
recursive prophet
Graduate Poster
Been waiting for a chance to throw in this quote, and as things have now slowed down a bit here goes:
Don’t fret about it though spork. While thousands wouldn’t, I believe you. Two questions: Are you going to ever update that poll you started on humber’s actual level of knowledge on physics? Looks to me like sol’s name should be added to those who think he knows quite a bit, and perhaps some others have changed their minds?
The second question I’ve wanted to ask for a long time, but kept thinking I’d find the answer. Why haven’t you had one of the carts tested at some university or independent test lab? With all this online speculation, the tests I’ve seen leave a lot to the imagination. And Mythbusters doesn't really have that much credibility IMHO. Did you see the airplane on the belt? If this has been covered and I just forgot, my apologies.
@Ross: I’d definitely give my vote to humber as most compelling, and to spork as most convincing. Aren’t there a lot of people in the physics community that think the cart really can’t go DDWFTTW? Is it not even possible humber has spotted some things others here haven’t? And again I wonder-as I did in an earlier post, about continuity. Without it how do we account for gusts of wind above the average wind speed? [sorry if these are really dumb questions, but they’re my specialty.]
It’s funny retorts such as this that got me wondering some time back if spork was ‘in fact’ humber. The humor style of the 2 has a lot in common, and I’ve believed all along humber would have to know a lot more about physics than most here assume to keep this crowd coming back for more in over 100 pages. I don’t see how he could possibly manage it all, but calling for a mod check is a red herring for sure. Even I could create a sock the admin could never prove ‘I had a hand in,’ so clearly somebody as sharp as spork must know better than to beg us to get them to check him out. Like, he’d be foolish enough to use the same IP he does as spork or what?
Don’t fret about it though spork. While thousands wouldn’t, I believe you. Two questions: Are you going to ever update that poll you started on humber’s actual level of knowledge on physics? Looks to me like sol’s name should be added to those who think he knows quite a bit, and perhaps some others have changed their minds?
The second question I’ve wanted to ask for a long time, but kept thinking I’d find the answer. Why haven’t you had one of the carts tested at some university or independent test lab? With all this online speculation, the tests I’ve seen leave a lot to the imagination. And Mythbusters doesn't really have that much credibility IMHO. Did you see the airplane on the belt? If this has been covered and I just forgot, my apologies.
@Ross: I’d definitely give my vote to humber as most compelling, and to spork as most convincing. Aren’t there a lot of people in the physics community that think the cart really can’t go DDWFTTW? Is it not even possible humber has spotted some things others here haven’t? And again I wonder-as I did in an earlier post, about continuity. Without it how do we account for gusts of wind above the average wind speed? [sorry if these are really dumb questions, but they’re my specialty.]
Cling wrap, Klingons, whatever. Activate your cloaking device and keep ignoring the fact that all your rebuttals aren't worth the kleenex to wrap them in. Either way, leftovers that no one wants.
Pirate Pete, the one who demonstrates exchange of KE by firing cannonballs to propel his ship?
Where the "merely" was once the mainstay of your claim to windspeed for all wind driven objects. The graphs show that the load can never reach windspeed.
So, just to be clear,
NO VIDEO
NO CITAION FOR NEGATIVE DRAG
NO CIATION FOR CAVITATION IN GAS
ALL promised, NONE delivered.
Yes, I'm the one doing the evading.
You're serious? You consider your graph as proof that the skater can only get to 50% of the windspeed?
No more than those remarks propel your argument. The skater will not behave on the treadmill as indicated by my graphs.
You still cannot tell me how the belt can generate the drive in the wheel.
Yes. It is about power transfer. The power
Last edited:
You have no interest in drag or cavitation. If you do, look it up yourself.
Sure she can. Get a bigger balloon (more power), put a pulley on the balloon and attach one end of the rope to the ground and hold onto the other end (more speed). Simple. All powered by the wind.
No. Gears have no power gain. Try again.
If you have a bigger balloon then you will go faster, so the load will increase. Always at a greater rates than the driving force. Produce a graph or provide equations that contradict that. The skater will not get to windspeed, and the force will be that indicated, and not zero, at terminal velocity.
Last edited:
That is an OK approach for your analysis Humber, "use any equations you like. It won't matter."
But what if we are wanting an actual useful answer, should we not use actual useful equations?
Dan O.
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2007
- Messages
- 13,594
After the details like air density and coefficient of drag are normalized so that all of the constant terms canceled, 50% is the correct answer.
- Status