Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: krw <krw@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 15:29:53 -0400
In article <1174504316.730460.158250@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
SNIPrf_man_frTHIS@xxxxxxxxx says...
On Mar 21, 3:06 pm, krw <k...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <1174496316.936402.15...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
SNIPrf_man_frT...@xxxxxxxxx says...
On Mar 21, 12:36 pm, Charlie Edmondson <edmond...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
DJ Delorie wrote:
"Frank Raffaeli" <SNIPrf_man_frT...@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
I've witnessed this experiment. Tell me how it's done.
The air holes aren't perfectly vertical, and the air chamber below
doesn't produce perfectally vertical laminar flow.
I.e. the air out of the holes is slightly chaotic, with individual
holes able to accumulate spin and speed on the puck.
Also, when you release the finger off the puck, it is never 'perfect'
and so imparts its own torque to the puck.
Charlie
That's not it. You need to hold the object with both hands to keep it
from turning. It's not magic and it's not a trick. Rotational momentum
of the object is increasing.
Yabut the the table is spinning the opposite direction. ;-)/2
--
Keith
The experiment works the same way in the Northern or Southern
hemisphere, and the device can be configured to spin in either
direction. The rotational velocity keeps increasing.
Doesn't matter. The table is spinning opposite the puck. Angular
momentum is conserved. The table is connected to the Earth, so it's
not spinning much, but...
--
Keith
.
Frank
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: Frank Raffaeli
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: Frank Raffaeli
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- References:
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: MassiveProng
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: krw
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: MassiveProng
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: Richard Henry
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: Richard Henry
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: krw
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: Jim Thompson
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: Robert Latest
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: Frank Raffaeli
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: DJ Delorie
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: Charlie Edmondson
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: Frank Raffaeli
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: krw
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: Frank Raffaeli
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- Prev by Date: Re: Evil Designers Guide to Copying Patents
- Next by Date: Re: Evil Designers Guide to Copying Patents
- Previous by thread: Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- Next by thread: Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading