Be Excellent To Each Other
https://www.beexcellenttoeachother.com/forum/

A classic Internet debate...
https://www.beexcellenttoeachother.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=201		 Page 4 of 4
Author:  thomsedavi [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:46 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
I concur with Morte. However, instead of going back to sleep I will go back to watching Blakes 7.

p.s. The question was answered on the first page. All intermediate pages between that post and this entry are completely and utterly irrelevant.
Author:  ElephantBanjoGnome [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 12:39 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
After refering my physics mate to this thread, he then responded with this:

http://www.ooine.com/index.cfm/2006/2/5 ... onstructed

While now accepting that I am in fact wrong, and the plane will take off, I find it much easier to accept with the quality of this explanation :)

I think the stumbling block is not realising that the wheels are ultimately free-wheeling, rather than being the source of propulsion. So yes, the plane does move, and the speed of the wheels will increase, but because it's not connected to the source of propulsion it's seperate to the whole thing. Yes, we can close this thread now ;D
Author:  Zardoz [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 12:41 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Where do they bury the survivors though?
Author:  thomsedavi [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 12:45 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Good grief. I too would reiterate what was already said on page one, but quite frankly this episode of Blakes 7 is far too riveting.
Author:  Cras [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 12:46 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
ComicalGnomes wrote:
I think the stumbling block is not realising that the wheels are ultimately free-wheeling, rather than being the source of propulsion. So yes, the plane does move, and the speed of the wheels will increase, but because it's not connected to the source of propulsion it's seperate to the whole thing. Yes, we can close this thread now ;D


We did tell you that though

;)
Author:  Zardoz [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 12:47 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
You don't bury survivors!
Author:  thomsedavi [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:00 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Zardoz wrote:
You don't bury survivors!

Ah, crud. What am I going to do with this spade now?

Incidentally, this whole thread has inspired me to design the world's first wheel-propelled airplane.

Incidentally, Avon saved the day by outwitting the alien monster thing. As usual.
Author:  MrD [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:02 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
I'm not sure anyone survived this thread.
Author:  kalmar [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:04 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
ComicalGnomes wrote:
I think the stumbling block is not realising that the wheels are ultimately free-wheeling, rather than being the source of propulsion. So yes, the plane does move, and the speed of the wheels will increase, but because it's not connected to the source of propulsion it's seperate to the whole thing.


Well, to coin a phrase, "Duh" :)
Author:  Zardoz [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:09 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Why don't they make shorter airports then with 'tread-ways'?
Author:  MaliA [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:10 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Because the 'plane still requires to get up to speed before taking off...
Author:  Malc [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:11 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
My problem was I couldn't see the difference between "the treadmill will match the speed of the plane" with "the treadmill will match the speed of the wheels"

If you were take the "speed of the wheel" to be the "speed of the center of a wheel relative to a stationary object not on the treadmill" then I would have been correct :)

Malc
Author:  Malc [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:12 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Zardoz wrote:
Why don't they make shorter airports then with 'tread-ways'?


The treadway would have to be twice as long as a normal runway, if they were the other way round then it would help (but I imagine that would be very ineffecient)

Malc
Author:  kalmar [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:16 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Spinglo Sponglo! wrote:
Zardoz wrote:
Why don't they make shorter airports then with 'tread-ways'?


The treadway would have to be twice as long as a normal runway


No it wouldn't.
Author:  MrD [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:20 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Are you talking belt length or structure length? (The length of the belt would be at least twice the length of the structure, and the length of the structure in this case would be at least the length of a regular runway.)
Author:  Malc [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:21 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
kalmar wrote:
Spinglo Sponglo! wrote:
Zardoz wrote:
Why don't they make shorter airports then with 'tread-ways'?


The treadway would have to be twice as long as a normal runway


No it wouldn't.


Well maybe not twice, but it will need to be longer, after all if the engines were not on, the plane would be being pushed back. (or the engines would have to work harder wither way it's not as practical as just having what we have at the moment)

Malc
Author:  Malc [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:22 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
MrD wrote:
Are you talking belt length or structure length? (The length of the belt would be at least twice the length of the structure, and the length of the structure in this case would be at least the length of a regular runway.)


Structure length. the belt would be pusing the plane back some, so it will need to work harder or longer to get up to the same speed compared to a normal runway.

Malc
Author:  Zardoz [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:22 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Why don't plane wings flap? Then they wouldn't need treadways.
Author:  Malc [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:24 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Zardoz wrote:
Why don't plane wings flap? Then they wouldn't need treadways.


Bird wings are light, plane wings are not.

it's also easier to push something in a straight line (like an engine does) compared to making something that flaps.

Malc
Author:  Zardoz [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:26 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Why don't they make light flappy aircraft wings? They'd save a fortune on tarmac and treadways.
Author:  Malc [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:31 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
it's also easier to push something in a straight line (like an engine does) compared to making something that flaps.
Author:  kalmar [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:36 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Man, you'd have thought after recent performances, that certain people wouldn't suddenly declare themselves to be experts in aeronautical matters. Although, this is the internet, so fair enough..
Author:  Zardoz [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:39 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Spinglo Sponglo! wrote:
it's also easier to push something in a straight line (like an engine does) compared to making something that flaps.


Nothing good ever came easy.
Author:  ElephantBanjoGnome [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:40 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Clearly the answer is to fly by harrier jumpjet instead.
Author:  Malc [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:41 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
kalmar wrote:
Man, you'd have thought after recent performances, that certain people wouldn't suddenly declare themselves to be experts in aeronautical matters. Although, this is the internet, so fair enough..


Who's declaring anything?

Malc
Author:  Zardoz [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:52 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Why don't we travel the world by jumping down through the earth in tubes?
Author:  ElephantBanjoGnome [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:55 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
We can't drill down that far. Also, I can't remember what's supposed to happen. Are you crushed, or would you just hang in a certain spot where gravity is at some kind of self-cancelling equilibrium?
Author:  Zardoz [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 13:56 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
ComicalGnomes wrote:
We can't drill down that far.

Get robots to do it.

Also: Anyone in their right mind knows the biggest problem down there is fighting dinosaurs.
Author:  Curiosity [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 14:27 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
ComicalGnomes wrote:
We can't drill down that far. Also, I can't remember what's supposed to happen. Are you crushed, or would you just hang in a certain spot where gravity is at some kind of self-cancelling equilibrium?


Burning aside, if you could negate air resistance you could pop out the other end of the world. Sadly, air resistance would cause you to oscillate with damped harmonic motion (or something) until you came to rest in the middle. Even more sadly, you'd get burnt to death long before that.
Author:  pupil [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 14:33 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Yeah, but seriously, Zardoz is right, the Dinosaurs would get you first before any of this other stuff got chance to happen.
Author:  kalmar [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 14:39 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
There was an episode of Angel where they had, like, a demon long-term parking facility right through the centre of the earth. Good use of space I thought.
Author:  markg [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 14:41 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
pupil wrote:
Yeah, but seriously, Zardoz is right, the Dinosaurs would get you first before any of this other stuff got chance to happen.

No. A quick sidestep and they'd stumble into your tunnel and explode.
Author:  Zardoz [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 15:13 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Pterodactyls wouldn't, they'd scream your face off.
Author:  myp [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 15:13 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
So we're in agreement: the plane couldn't take off.
Author:  Grim... [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 15:14 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
myoptika wrote:
So we're in agreement: the plane couldn't take off.

Correct - it had no fuel.
Author:  Zardoz [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 15:14 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Unless it had lightweight flappy wings.
Author:  Squirt [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 15:15 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Or was being pushed along whilst on rollerskates.
Author:  Pundabaya [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 15:16 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
myoptika wrote:
So we're in agreement: the plane couldn't take off.


*takes a piece of 2 by 4, writes 'Feynman's physics education stick' on it in black marker, and proceeds to beat Myoptika round the head with it*
Author:  MaliA [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 15:17 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Pundabaya wrote:
myoptika wrote:
So we're in agreement: the plane couldn't take off.


*takes a piece of 2 by 4, writes 'Feynman's physics education stick' on it in black marker, and proceeds to beat Myoptika round the head with it*


Then plays bongos and (SNIP - libel ed)
Author:  Curiosity [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 15:19 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
markg wrote:
pupil wrote:
Yeah, but seriously, Zardoz is right, the Dinosaurs would get you first before any of this other stuff got chance to happen.

No. A quick sidestep and they'd stumble into your tunnel and explode.


I would personally take a small pump with me as I burrowed, to inflate them until they popped.
Author:  Cras [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 15:23 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Don't take a sword and cut them in half - you'll be faced with twice as many dinosaurs if you do.
Author:  kalmar [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 15:25 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Craster wrote:
Don't take a sword and cut them in half - you'll be faced with twice as many dinosaurs if you do.


And definitely don't take a cheesegrater, then.
Author:  ElephantBanjoGnome [ Mon Apr 07, 2008 17:53 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
It turns out the plane was planning to depart from terminal 5 all along, and so never had a chance of taking off.
Author:  Lloyd Mangram [ Tue Apr 08, 2008 8:59 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
ComicalGnomes wrote:
I think the stumbling block is not realising that the wheels are ultimately free-wheeling, rather than being the source of propulsion. So yes, the plane does move, and the speed of the wheels will increase, but because it's not connected to the source of propulsion it's seperate to the whole thing. Yes, we can close this thread now ;D


a) People tried to point this out to you multiple times in this very thread.

b) Did you and your clever physics mate really need people to explain to you that when a plane charges down a runway with its jet engines roaring, that it is those same ROARING JET ENGINES that are providing the thrust?

c) Your mate should turn in his "I'm A Physicist" card and take up something else. Like pottery.
Author:  kalmar [ Tue Apr 08, 2008 9:09 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Lloyd Mangram wrote:
ComicalGnomes wrote:
I think the stumbling block is not realising that the wheels are ultimately free-wheeling, rather than being the source of propulsion. So yes, the plane does move, and the speed of the wheels will increase, but because it's not connected to the source of propulsion it's seperate to the whole thing. Yes, we can close this thread now ;D


a) People tried to point this out to you multiple times in this very thread.

b) Did you and your clever physics mate really need people to explain to you that when a plane charges down a runway with its jet engines roaring, that it is those same ROARING JET ENGINES that are providing the thrust?


Welcome, LLoyd. You're his physics mate, aren't you. You are, aren't you. Go on, you are.
Author:  Grim... [ Tue Apr 08, 2008 13:04 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
If you're not, you perhaps should be ;)
Author:  Zardoz [ Tue Apr 08, 2008 13:17 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Lets get Physics-al, Physics-al,
I wanna get Physics-aaaaaaaaaaaaal,
Lemme hear you Spodders squark, you Spodders squark
Author:  ElephantBanjoGnome [ Tue Apr 08, 2008 13:57 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
Lloyd Mangram wrote:
ComicalGnomes wrote:
I think the stumbling block is not realising that the wheels are ultimately free-wheeling, rather than being the source of propulsion. So yes, the plane does move, and the speed of the wheels will increase, but because it's not connected to the source of propulsion it's seperate to the whole thing. Yes, we can close this thread now ;D


a) People tried to point this out to you multiple times in this very thread.

b) Did you and your clever physics mate really need people to explain to you that when a plane charges down a runway with its jet engines roaring, that it is those same ROARING JET ENGINES that are providing the thrust?

c) Your mate should turn in his "I'm A Physicist" card and take up something else. Like pottery.

Just looks like some little tosspot who signed up purely to take a poke at me. How very special :)
Author:  Lloyd Mangram [ Wed Apr 09, 2008 0:35 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
ComicalGnomes wrote:
Just looks like some little tosspot who signed up purely to take a poke at me. How very special :)


I did, yes. And I realise that signing up just to vent at someone is a pisspoor way to start posting on a forum, and I now I'd be best off fading back into the lurky shadows from whence I came, but there's something about this debate that never fails to make my normally restful dander rise until it most definitely is up.

Mainly what got me going was the fact that others persistently tried to explain the "wheels aren't pushing the plane/think of a rollerskate being pushed on a treadmill" concept to you, only to have you stick your fingers in your ears and say "No no no I'm going to check with my physics mate! He's smart." And then your brilliant physics mate goes and gets it all arse about anyway, AND THEN after your mate finds a page that can explain it in terms he can understand so that you both finally comprehend the matter, you come back and state that you find it "much easier to accept with the quality of this explanation" and then attempt to explain the so-called stumbling block to everyone else, even though that stumbling block is like a single block of Lego placed in the middle of the Black Rock Desert.

At that point, I began thrashing about wildly like a slug in a saltshaker and signed up to let off steam.

I really shouldn't have gotten worked up, as the majority of the responses in this thread were on the mark. It even had clever chaps addressing the feedback loop that would be caused if the treadmill was supposed to match the rotational speed of the wheels, though thankfully that wasn't the terms of the question in this case.

But anyway, vent I did, and I understand that makes me a tosspot or an arsewanker or just a big greasy nerd, but that's something I'm going to have to live with. I'm also going to have to live with my blood pressure being too easily raised by threads on forums... but oh god this plane on runway thing why oh why arrrrghgrhrjhhfzqv#k$&~^

connection lost_
Author:  ElephantBanjoGnome [ Wed Apr 09, 2008 7:50 ]
Post subject:  Re: A classic Internet debate...
very special.
Page 4 of 4 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/