Travis In Austin

I'm taking the bait again, and running the line out!!!! Whizzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!!! Yes, and if the wheels were frictionless and free to spin (thus treadmill has zero effect), the trust generated by the prop would propel the craft forward, which would in turn result in lift being generated by the air flowing across the planes foil. Ah!!!, but friction is real, and the craft will therefore move in a direction opposite to that of it's intended design use. And if memory serves me correctly, this problem stated that the treadmill moves and accelerate with a force that constantly matches the forward thrust (but opposite in direction) generated by the airplanes engine, be it a Lycoming / McDonnell Douglas / Pratt Whittney / Slingshot / Rubberband / Squirrels / Hamsters / Gerbils or anything your imagination can dream up;...... and unless the pilot stands on the brakes, there will always exist zero net movement of the aircraft relative to the air around it. Doesn't matter the engine type, size, or output, forward thrust is always being negated by the rearward movement caused by the treadmill. Put your car on the same self-accelerating treadmill with the skinniest tires money can buy, place the transmission in neutral and kick-on the treadmill. What happens? Bingo!! You either get it, or you keep bumping this very informative and educational tread. cough!, cough! Gilbert, You are thinking with a car analogy. The friction of the wheels is minimal and once you get them rolling it takes very little forward thrust to move. Pretty much every plane I have flown will taxi at the lowest idle speed. The analogy with a vehicle is to put it in meutral on the conveyer belt. Attach a cable to the front bumper of the vehicle beyond the length of the conveyor belt and attach it to a winch. You start winching the vehicle it begins to movw forward, the conveyer belt mives backwards, car keeps moving forward because car is in neutral and free spinning. Which gets faster and faster, car moves forward faster and faster. Put wings on that car and it will fly if pulled fast enoufh, which is one way they launch gliders. The propeller/jet engine on an airplane acts of the airplane the exact same way at a cable pulling on a car. The first question to ask is what would keep the plane from miving forward on the conveyor belt. It would not be the friction if the wheels, it is minimal at test, and way lower still once they begin rotating.

The speed of light in your reference frame is, v = (c − u)/(1 − u/c). For any speed u less than c this gives v = c so the speed of light is the same for you. But if u = c the formula degenerates to zero divided by zero; a meaningless answer

They project light which, from your perspective, appears to travel at the speed of light. The speed of light is always constant, irrespective of the relative speed of the observer. Weird, but that's what they say. I answered this already in another thread last week. As you approach the speed of light the law of special relativity holds true, but it colapses when it equals C.

They will go outside in shop or somewhere inside?

I miss OB as well.

Where is Meagain, MaxG, EdwinR, ?????

Bumping this thread to remind myself what was posted an hour ago in the hopes it will remind me what I had for breakfast.

Yes indeed. The question shoukd be does Bernoulli or Newton provide a better explination of lift as it relates to aircraft wings and flying. I believe it is clearly Newton, but Bernoulli was in all the books when I learned to fly on account of it being easier to u derstand conceptually.

Oppp, sorry I didn't see this ahen I made my post just previous to this. I don't think it has anything to do with fast brain ir slow brain, it has more to do with frame of reference. For nmost people this is an automobile or walking on a treadmill. You have to lose that frame of reference in order to visualize that the plane, and attached wings, move forward regardless of the speed of the conveyor belt in the opposite direction. Travis

LOL---that thurst is BEHIND thwe wings and not over them. No lift my freind! no lift, no fly.LOL thrust is not LIFT~~~ Think outside the box, that is your barrier to understanding the problem, everyone knows if the wings do not move throught the air they do not produce lift. The plane will in fact move forward, and the wings will produce lift. What Oldtimers is trying to tell you is that it will move forward because of thrust. Will an airplane move forward on top of a conveyor belt/treadmill? That is the fundamental question, and tha answer is yes it will. Why? The wheels on an airplane are free spinning.

LOL---that thurst is BEHIND thwe wings and not over them. No lift my freind! no lift, no fly.LOL thrust is not LIFT~~~ What is there about the conveyor belt moving backwards that keeps the plane from moving forward. Once you apply thrust the conveyor belt can be going whatever speed, the plane moves independent of the conbeyor belt, it accelerates as if there is no conveyer belt at all, generates lift and flys.

newton and bernoulli says, "plane will not take off.....no lift."http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/fluids/airfoil.html It will take off, it has been show many, many times on youtube and wvem an episode of mythbusters. I was a non-believwr once myself. You have to get past the mental stumbling block of the wheels. The plane will in fact move forward once power is applied and will achieve V1 and take off. We are prone to think in terms of automobiles, but an airplane has freespining wheels. That is the key to understanding while it will in fact fly. Travis P.S. I didn't bump it.

SCOTUS end of term roundup discussion and links. http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/07/monday-round-up-265/

SCOTUS Justices trash talk each other and how to respond. http://bigthink.com/praxis/how-to-hurl-insults-back-at-justice-scalia

Don't stop the carnival.

That is a great point Larry on the matching. I had the advantage of knowing that Gary's was running same brand on same phono pre, and I had send the cartridge specs to Mark, [the Mfg] to to get his input, and finally, I had an opportunity to audition it on my equipment first which of course is the best way to tell if feasible.

Oppps, our posts crossed, I had to respond to a police shooting in Austin last last night and was tied up for many hours just became aware of this great thread.

I concur in that suggestion wholeheartedly. Many years ago I posted my thoughts on several MC cartridges I auditioned, the thread is here. https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/85166-cartridge-auditions-part-deaux-photos/ You will have to forgive my shortcomings in being able to articulate what I was seeking, and what I was hearing. I hope it may be of some help to you. LarryC was very instrumental in helping me to achive what I was looking for. I wish you the same success. Travis

So what really happened on the 4th of July in 1776. Not much really, it was a date picked out of convenience. The shot heard round the world and fight for independence started the year prior, Thomas has drafted the DOI a couple of months earlier (with some revisions by Ben and Adams), and it wasn't signed until August. Here is the answer. http://www.constitutionfacts.com/us-declaration-of-independence/fourth-of-july/

I think Dave LaFlamme sort of invented rocking on a violin. This is over 40 years ago https://youtu.be/q918fs4RAto

I heard some great reports from our friend on Chicago about last night's show.

Love it.

BP to Pay $18.7 Billion to Settle Deepwater Horizon http://flip.it/PzbwB

They did Casey Jones for Encore is San Jose. Sadly, that will be my last stop on that train ride. I was hoping to hook up with my friend in Chicago, but it just wasn't in the cards unfortunately. I am wishing him the best time, with family, friends, and hoping there is something about the weekend that brings him a bright new horizon (which sometimes happens at one of these shows, but that is for another time). Travis

Carl, Would a wifi capable tstat do you any good at all? One you can control from phone?