Re: KE = ½ mv^2 is disproved in a new falling object impact test.

On Oct 16, 3:19 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Oct 14, 1:31 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On Oct 14, 12:09 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Oct 13, 10:05 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Oct 12, 6:11 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Oct 9, 8:26 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Oct 8, 10:55 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Oct 7, 6:05 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Oct 7, 12:04 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Oct 6, 2:43 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Oct 5, 6:10 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Oct 3, 3:21 pm, "dkel...@xxxxxxxxxxx" <dkel...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Oct 2, 4:58 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Oct 1, 9:51 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sep 29, 9:48 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sep 25, 12:14 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sep 24, 11:10 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Dear Dwight:  The terminal velocity of PTFE is about 220 miles per
hour.  A 12 foot drop is nowhere hear that fast!  — NoEinstein —

Where on earth did you get that number?

Dear PD: The terminal velocity of a human body, SG = 1, is 110 mph.
So the terminal velocity of a ball of SG = 2 is twice as much, or 220
mph.  — NoEinstein —

Here, let me help you. In terms of the specific gravity, the terminal
velocity is given by this relation:
[Terminal velocity] = sqrt{2 [specific gravity] [volume] g / [drag
coeff] [projected area]}
which we'll abbreviate this way:
Vt = sqrt{(2*d*V*g)/(Cd*A)}
So, if you want to find the ratio of terminal velocities between a
PTFE ball and a human body, here is how you find it:
Vt(ball)/Vt(human) = sqrt[d(ball)/d(human)] * sqrt[V(ball)/V(human)] *
sqrt [Cd(human)/Cd(ball)] * sqrt[A(human)/A(ball)]
Now, what you said you know is that d(ball)/d(human) = 2. So, by
itself this would make Vt(ball)/Vt(human) = 1..41.
However you haven't included what sqrt[V(ball)/V(human)] is.
And you haven't included what sqrt [Cd(human)/Cd(ball)] is.
And you haven't included what sqrt[A(human)/A(ball)] is.

Would you like to try your calculations again?

PD

Dear PD:  To get a "grip" on science, throw away your textbooks, and
use your one-neuron brain to figure things out.  — NoEinstein —

Hi
 Use one of your many neurons and find where rain falls and 100 mph.
It is not even close.
Dwight- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dear Dwight: Rain which condenses closer to the Earth would be
slower.  I used to hitchhike home from college in any weather.  Some
raindrops do sting, but because its mass hits gradually, the high
speed isn't too apparent.  To sense how speed affects your pain, stick
your hand out of a car window and let the car cause side impacts of
your hand to the raindrops.  At 60 plus mph, you can definitely feel
the impacts, but you won't have to go to the doctor.  — NoEinstein —

And the fact that rain falling vertically does not sting, and that
rain on your hand traveling at 60 mph on the road does sting more,
should tell you that the rain falling vertically cannot possibly be
traveling 100 mph.

Here's a quarter. Go buy yourself a clue.

PD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dear PD:  Have you ever stuck your hand out of a car window in the
rain?  You won't suffer any pain.  But 60 mph is a different matter
from 100 mph.  To give you something more constructive to consider,
can you explain a weird occurrence which happened to me?  One winter I
was cleaning fallen limbs from my yard following a bad ice storm.  I
was doing the work on a sunny day with not a cloud in the spy.  The
leaves on the ground were dry, though there were still some patches of
ice that hadn't melted.  As I sawed up a limb with my bow saw, I heard
what sounded like a squirrel hitting the ground behind me..  When I
looked, there was a three foot diameter circular wet spot in the
leaves.  That water had fallen from a clear blue sky.  Do you have an
explanation?  — NoEinstein —

obviously 100mph raindrops from a passing car- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dear PD:  'Passing cars' brings up a good point.  Turbulence of any
kind breaks down the size of raindrops.  So rain caught in high wind
becomes like 'thicker air'.  The biggest and most stinging raindrops
come at the beginning of a thunderstorm.  Of course there is
turbulence in the cloud itself.  But the leading edge of the falling
rain, as the cloud moves, is far enough outside the turbulence that
the biggest drops can fall.  These clouds can be several miles high.
So. 100 mph velocities can be reached.  — NoEinstein —

This is contrary to measurements, NoEinstein.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dear PD: "Vague" disagreements don't further the cause of science..
Learn to elucidate, and you yourself will be open to being disagreed
with.  — NoEinstein —

Experimental data cannot be disagreed with. The *measured* speed of
raindrops disagrees with your statements, despite your concerns that
the measurements may not be accurate. This is not cutting edge science
or difficult measurement, NoEinstein. It is not hard for you to do
some web browsing to see what's been measured and how.

PD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dear PD:  You are like a broken record with the needle stuck in a
groove.  Listening to you is a waste of my time.  — NoEinstein —

Well, if you don't want to look at experimental data, that's your
business, NoEinstein. However, you should then at least confess to
yourself that you don't really care for science after all, and that
it's not what you thought it was about.

PD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dear PD:  I care about science very much, but for having to reply to
"ticks" like you.  — NoEinstein —

If you cared about science you would not dismiss experimental data. No
one who cares about science dismisses experimental data.

PD
.

Relevant Pages