|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
5th July 2011, 04:57 PM | #201 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,278
|
I'm going to do a more detailed follow-up post later (maybe tomorrow, maybe not) expanding this subject to cover the impulse which I eluded to early on in this thread, but for now here are the bullets.
1) He is using F = ma for his collision equation. That is completely and utterly wrong. As I demonstrated, F = ma is a special case of Newton's Second Law. He needs to use Newton's Second Law which deals with inertia (or momentum) and the conservation of energy. F = ma is the first derivative of the 2nd Law. 2) He cannot get his basic units and numbers right. He keeps using numbers he is pulling out of his rear. He used velocity for acceleration in the beginning. He got velocity units wrong. I could go on, but I'm sure the others will be happy to add to the list. 3) He is using the acceleration values (not at first, but now claims to be) from the FDR. If he uses those numbers, then he is calculating the amount of force being applied by the engines (and gravity), nothing more (they are positive, not negative). So in the end, he has exhibited a complete lack of understanding of physics, or how to apply sound mathematical principles. As such, most of us just don't have time to waste with utter morons. |
__________________
"Is your claim that the level of penetration is only governed by distance and not the material that is being penetrated?" - DGM |
|
5th July 2011, 05:04 PM | #202 |
NWO Master Conspirator
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
|
|
__________________
Vive la liberté! |
|
5th July 2011, 07:00 PM | #203 |
NWO Kitty Wrangler
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 29,690
|
This right here:
Quote:
He's apparently laughing at the notion that balloons, light poles and bagels should be expected to produce different impact forces. If he really believes that they should all be the same, he's so delusional nothing anyone could say will ever convince him he's wrong. |
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd |
|
6th July 2011, 02:37 AM | #204 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 18,667
|
This guy fknnewz is now in full insult mode against me. Well, says all about him, nothing about me... I just calmly serve him some physics. But as YT is no format to show work, and since I did some work, let me post some here for posterity:
A) "tell us oh master about ... the forces and the temperatures produced by your (low) figure of 54000N" He apparently thinks that simply applying a force on material (say, the steel of the airplane's frame) would result in whatever high temperatures. High enough to melt steel? Ignite fuel? I don't know. So apparently he thinks that when a light truck that weighs 5 tons rolls on the street, it will liquify the asphalt, or burn off its tyres... LOL I told him that he can get an upper bound of temperature from the upper bound of kinetic energy lost. In addition, you need to estimate the mass thusly heated, and look up material properties. Of course, every Joule that goes into heating material is lost for cold deformation. So here is a quick calculation: How much steel can you heat by how many degrees, if you use all the kinetic energy lost when plane collides with pole? 1. I established, in the above quoted post, that an upper bound for the kinetic energy that gets lost in a collsion between plane (80 tons, 154m/s) and pole (150kg) would be 1.78MJ (mass of plane is too low, but that would not significantly (<0.1%) change the energy transfer; maybe I'll expand on that in one of my next posts. speed of plane is also too low, by a factor of 1.6; I haven't yet calculated the difference that would make. At most a factor of 1.62 = 2.56. This is offset by the fact that my upper bound is higher than reality anyway). 2. Iron has a molar heat capacity of 25.10 J/mol/K 3. Iron has a Standard atomic weight of 55.845. That's 0.055845 kg/mol 4. -> Heat capacity per mass unit is (25.10 J/mol/K) / 0.055845 kg/mol = 449,46 J/kg/K. 5. -> delta-Ekin of our collision can result in temperature*mass of 1780000J / (449,46 J/kg/K) = 3960,32 kg*K. 6. -> This means that 3960,32 kg of iron could be heated by 1K, or 1kg of iron by 3960,32 (ignoring melting and boiling). Or we could draw the square root: 1,78MJ can heat 62.93kg of iron by 62.93°C. |
6th July 2011, 05:05 AM | #205 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,278
|
Okay, now to develop the concept of impulse that I intoduced at the beginning of this thread. Impulse is by definition in physics a force applied over an interval of time.
Momentum (inertia) is expressed in units of momenta. Momenta is expressed as kg*(m/s). Force is expressed as Newtons, or kg*(m/s2). So to apply the force acting on momentum, it must be multiplied by the time interval in seconds. Or, simply add the impulse (same thing). By spec, the max F is 58,000 N.The spec also defines the interval as 0.1 seconds for the exchange. This spec of course is considering approach/take-off areas where the speeds involved would be much lower than in our scenario, so we can consider this an upper boundary. Using Oystein's value of 80,000 kg for the plane's mass, an impulse of 58,000 N * 0.1 s will give a velocity change of 0.0725 m/s by spec. Oystein (using a lower estimate for F) calculated it to be 0.06 m/s. Once again, agreement in order of magnitude. Moral of the story? Oystein properly applied Newton's Second and the moron at YT does not have a clue. |
__________________
"Is your claim that the level of penetration is only governed by distance and not the material that is being penetrated?" - DGM |
|
6th July 2011, 05:28 AM | #206 |
NWO Kitty Wrangler
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 29,690
|
Which is also consistent with the conclusion we reached when he insisted he could use a=v to calculate the force applied. Moral of this story? Trying to argue about physics with morons who know nothing about physics is largely a waste of time, since they can't understand your counter-arguments anyway. |
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd |
|
6th July 2011, 05:39 AM | #207 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,278
|
A much better moral
I stopped my participation at YT when he started using the f-bomb as a counter-argument. I only developed the concepts further here for the sake of the OP author and to verify Oystein's approach to the problem. We all need a little back-up from time-to-time. |
__________________
"Is your claim that the level of penetration is only governed by distance and not the material that is being penetrated?" - DGM |
|
6th July 2011, 06:49 AM | #208 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,278
|
I have not looked at the YT thread for a few days now, but glancing over it now I see what the guy is missing. Newton's Third Law, for every action there is an equal but opposite reaction.
The pole (which he is ignoring) is by spec designed to exert a force no greater than 58 kN. If he wants to assert a greater force for the collision, he must explain how the POLE, not the plane was able to assert the force. The guy cannot assert the 2nd Law and ignore the 3rd. |
__________________
"Is your claim that the level of penetration is only governed by distance and not the material that is being penetrated?" - DGM |
|
6th July 2011, 08:16 AM | #209 |
Muse
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 686
|
Thanks for the effort, now if i can only apply what i've learned about physics to something useful instead of debating if the laws of physics were broken on 9/11.
It has been educational though. I never really bother with the 9/11 conspiracy, i much prefer annoying the freemen but the Icke freemen have been a bit quiet lately. |
6th July 2011, 09:16 AM | #210 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 18,667
|
B) "100,000kg youd better recalculate - that will add to your 54000N wont it - please post revised figure for impact"
That chap, fknnewz, has realized his numbers were not quite correct. He first gave me 80,000kg for the plane, 150kg for the pole, 154m/s for the plane. I calculated with these numbers without checking if they are correct. Now he thinks that increasing the mass of the heavier collision partner by 25% would significantly increase the impact force. Is that so? As we will see, this is not the case. Increase is hardly perceptible. Since I modelled an inelastic collision, that means momentum gets perfectly conserved, but kinetic energy gets lost, and the velocity of both collision partners will be the same after the collision. First some nomenclature: E = kinetic energy P = Momentum m = mass v = speed f = force s = distance (along which force is applied/momentum is transferred) t = time p denotes plane alone (before collision) l denotes lamp post alone (before collision) p+l denotes plane and lamp post combined (after collision) 1. Pp = mp * vp = Pp+l = (mp+ml) * vp+l 2. -> vp+l = mp*vp/(mp+ml) 3a. Ep = 0.5 * mp * vp2 3b. Ep+l = 0.5 * (mp+ml) * vp+l2 4. -> delta-E = Ep - Ep+l = 0.5*mp*vp2 - 0.5*(mp+ml)*vp+l2 = 0.5*mp*vp2 - 0.5*(mp+ml)*vp*mp2/(mp+ml)2 = 0.5*mp*vp2 - 0.5*mp*vp2*mp/(mp+ml) = Ep * (1-mp/(mp+ml)) 5. Since E = f*s, and s can be assumed constant, the force applied to pole and wing also changes by a factor of (1-mp/(mp+ml)): fp+l = fp * (1-mp/(mp+ml)) 6. For mp=80,000kg, ml=150kg, vp=154m/s, delta-E is delta-E = 0.5*80,000kg*(154m/s)2 * (1 - 80,000kg/80,150kg) = 948,640,000J * 0,0018715 = 1,775,371J. See my earlier post. For mp=100,000kg, ml=150kg, vp=154m/s, delta-E is delta-E = 0.5*100,000kg*(154m/s)2 * (1 - 100,000kg/100,150kg) = 1,185,800,000J * 0,00149775 = 1,776,035J. This differs from the first case by merely 0.03%. 7. In general, an increase of the weight of the moving collision partner (the plane) by Xp (given as a factor, for example increase of 25% means Xp=1.25) will increase delta-E, and the impact force f, by a factor of (mp+ml/Xp)/(mp+ml) We see: The factor by which we increase the heavier partner gets applied to the lighter partner! And since the pole has less than 2% of total mass, the difference in force is negligible! 8. In general, an increase of the weight of the resting collision partner (the pole) by Xl (given as a factor, for example increase of 25% means Xl=1.25) will increase delta-E, and the impact force f, by a factor of (mp+ml)*Xl/(mp + mlXl) When mp is very much larger than ml, then this term will result in something very close to Xl. In our case (mp=80tons, ml of 150kg increased by factor 1.25 to 187.5kg), the increase in delta-E is by a factor of 1,2494. 9. -> Destructive force and energy depend almost entirely on the lighter of two masses, and is nearly independent of the heavier mass, when the heavier partner is very much heavier than the lighter one. (When two masses m1 and m2 collide, where the mass of m2=Q*m1, any change of m1 by a factor of X will result in a change of damage energy by a factor of (Q+1)/(Q+X). If Q is very large (m1>>m2), any small change of m1 (the light partner) will result in an damage change of nearly X. If Q is very small (m1<<m2), the damage change will be very close to 1, i.e. hardly any change at all) 10. If our estimated plane speed is off by a factor of X, the damage energy and force are off by a factor of X2. Proof: 10a. delta-E(vp) = 0.5*mp*vp2 * (1 - mp/(mp+ml)) 10b. delta-E(vp*X) = 0.5*mp*(vp*X)2 * (1 - mp/(mp+ml)) 10c. -> delta-E(vp*X) / delta-E(vp) = X2 So getting the speed wrong by a factor 1.6 (fknnewz confused mph with km/h) gets the impact force / concerted energy wrong by a factor of 2.56. |
6th July 2011, 09:24 AM | #211 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,278
|
Oystein, you got way too much time on your hands.
|
__________________
"Is your claim that the level of penetration is only governed by distance and not the material that is being penetrated?" - DGM |
|
6th July 2011, 09:28 AM | #212 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 18,667
|
|
6th July 2011, 09:29 AM | #213 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 18,667
|
|
6th July 2011, 11:27 AM | #214 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
If that is what he really believes then a simple exercise can illustrate his error. Have a friend of his roll a scoccer ball at him at a set velocity so that it hits his leg. Then try this again with a bowling ball at the same velocity. If one creates a greater difference in how his leg reacts then the impact forces are different. I suggest that he find a friend who is good at controlling ball speed. Perhaps he knows a semi-pro bowler.
|
6th July 2011, 11:33 AM | #215 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
In an Apollo Hoax thread on the blackvault I proved with math and physics that the dust kicked up by the rover would actually fall FASTER on the moon than on Earth.
The response was that I was using "NASA" numbers and formulas and therefore all of it was worthless. When I then pointed out that these were in existance a full century before NASA existed I was toild that I believed everything I was told. The poster on YT seems of the same contentious illogical bent as my HBer. There is no winning an arguement with a deranged person. |
6th July 2011, 11:39 AM | #216 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 18,667
|
That is not what he believes; but it is not entirely clear what he believes.
In your example, both balls are lighter than the body they hit. Mass difference there does make a considerable difference. However, it doesn't matter nearly as much if the person hit by a soccer ball is 180lb or 220lb. What matters most is how fast the ball is. And of course the material matters: A soccer ball may lose a couple of inches of its radius to compression upon impact, the bowling ball only a fraction of a mm. The force to stop the soccer ball will thus be a lot less, but spread out over a longer time, than the force to stop the bowling ball. |
6th July 2011, 11:48 AM | #217 |
NWO Kitty Wrangler
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 29,690
|
When I read that original comment, I really tried to read it so it would make sense. But really, if he understands that lighter objects will impact with smaller forces, how does that comment make sense?
Quote:
He's ridiculing you for being "so clever" by asking you to confirm what he already knows? It just doesn't make sense! "Ha ha, Mr. Clever People, can you tell us if things fall down under the influence of gravity, since you're so clever?" |
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd |
|
6th July 2011, 12:23 PM | #218 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 18,667
|
Horatius, you expect a truther to make sense.
I'll leave it to you to find what's wrong with your thinking |
6th July 2011, 01:20 PM | #219 |
NWO Kitty Wrangler
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 29,690
|
|
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd |
|
6th July 2011, 02:17 PM | #220 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
Actually in my example its the mass of the ball that matters most since both balls are travelling the same velocity. However given that the bowling ball is easily >10X the mass of the scoccer ball the momentum will also be greater than 10X of the scoccer ball. If we change my example to having the ball hit him dead center of mass while he is on a frictionless surface then the bowling ball will cause his velocity to change from zero to over 10X that which the scoccer ball causes him to change velocity(assuming he catches the ball and holds on)
Now if instead of a scoccer ball/bowling ball we compare a scoccer ball to a basketball one is only slightly heavier than the other and the difference in the change in velocity will be miniscule. I would expect a human to be approx 100X more massive than a scoccer ball and the difference between the two balls to be within 15% of each other. NOW if both balls are travelling the same V they are going to cause the human+ball velocity to be 1/101V and 1/1015V respectively (if my calcs done in my head are correct.) that's 0.990099%V and 0.985222%V If V was 10 MPH then that's 0.099099 MPH and 0.0985222 MPH a difference of less than 0.5% No matter how fast the balls travel, if they both travel the same velocity they will affect the final velocity of the combination of the two masses by the same 0.5% If the ball was doing 400 MPH the difference between the final velocity imparted by each ball will still be 0.5%. What will change is the total final velocity of course since the original system had a lot more total momentum. Turn it around and make the ball stationary and throw him at the ball and nothing really changes other than the doppler effect of his screaming, "hey you ******* guys, cut it the *** out". However the change in velocity will now be (100/101)V and (100/101.5)V 99.099%V and 98.5222%V, still a difference of less than 0.5% between the two The lightpole is much less than 1% the mass of the aircraft. Hell, a Cessna 175 has probably 100 times more mass than a light pole. |
6th July 2011, 02:33 PM | #221 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 18,667
|
We are not in disagreement. I said
Originally Posted by Oystein
Originally Posted by Oystein
Like I computed for plane and pole, where the plane is more than 500 times more massive than the pole: - Change mass of plane by 25%, and impact force changes by 0.03% - Change mass of pole by 25%, and impact force changes by 24.98% - Change mass of speed by 25%, and impact force changes by 56.25% So in that sense, speed matters the most. If you have no change of speed, change of force is 0%, of course |
6th July 2011, 03:16 PM | #222 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
I know we are both saying the same thing since we are both working from the POV of a conservation of momentum whereas your YT poster is working from a POV of utter nonsense combined with a political worldview which demands that 9/11 and many other disasters be a vast complicated plot by a a shadow gov't bent on world domination.
If you expect the world is a loaded gun that is pointed at you then you will see gun barrels everywhere. |
6th July 2011, 04:03 PM | #223 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,278
|
Ya'll making my head hurt
|
__________________
"Is your claim that the level of penetration is only governed by distance and not the material that is being penetrated?" - DGM |
|
6th July 2011, 10:42 PM | #224 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 18,667
|
Reminds me of the day when I, hailing from wilde-beast-free Germany, left camp in the southern Rockies for a short hiking stroll alone. I had made the mistake of asking if any bears, wolves, mountain lions exist in the area. The answer "yes, yes and yes, but don't worry, they are rare and shy" made me hear bear footsteps everywhere. Well, each turned out to be just a squirrel or some bird... still I couldn't get the idea out of my mind that soon I will be eaten
|
7th July 2011, 11:59 AM | #225 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
Just to keep you on your toes Oys........
[thread derail] My wife's boss lives on the outskirts of this town. He goes out to walk down the road in the morning for exercise. Last month he did this and as he walked around his house he saw a deer. Not unusual there are literally dozens of deer within city limits here. This one was a bit unusual though because it was standing stock still, not moving a muscle other than to watch the human. "OK" he thought, "odd" but continued his walk only to see a second deer accross the road doing the same thing. "What's with the deer this morning" he tells us he thought and again continued on his way. About 100 meters down the road a large wolf walked up out of bushes on the far side of the road and stopped and looked at him. Walking slowly backwards("My best Micheal Jackson Moonwalk ever") he went back in the house and skipped the walk that morning.[/thread derail] |
7th July 2011, 12:07 PM | #226 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
m1v1+m2v2=mTvT
mTvT{initial}=mTvT{final} "In a system of two objects the total momentum is the sum of the mass of each object times its velocity" "when objects collide the total momentum of the system in initial conditions must equal the total momentum of the system in its final conditions" Very simple actually |
7th July 2011, 04:25 PM | #227 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,278
|
Well darn, seems I have hurt Alpo's feelings by not posting all of the CIT cab photos.
Quote:
I also appreciate the new contribution to my signature Alpo
Quote:
Afterthought:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
__________________
"Is your claim that the level of penetration is only governed by distance and not the material that is being penetrated?" - DGM |
|
7th July 2011, 05:35 PM | #228 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,278
|
|
__________________
"Is your claim that the level of penetration is only governed by distance and not the material that is being penetrated?" - DGM |
|
7th July 2011, 07:50 PM | #229 |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 20,632
|
Whatever, from that thread
Originally Posted by Rob Balsamo
Go talk to those guys directly instead of boring us, BCR. |
7th July 2011, 07:59 PM | #230 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
Balsamo bans people without documentation. Balsamo is a moron, or a fraud, take your pick. He turns on posting, and then turns off posting, it makes him feel like he is in charge, it is what a Truth-NAZI does. He lets you post, then he silently bans you, so it looks like he won; what a tool. Going on 10 years of failure, moron math, and delusional DVDs. Do you support the pathetic email failure-Balsamo sent?
|
8th July 2011, 02:49 AM | #231 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,278
|
Include it all CE .... I can't post in that particular thread or respond to any relative topic. They will allow me to comment in the basement they call the 'debate section' though. So if I can't comment on relevant threads, what is the point? You get to respond to this thread in this thread.
|
__________________
"Is your claim that the level of penetration is only governed by distance and not the material that is being penetrated?" - DGM |
|
8th July 2011, 02:59 AM | #232 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 18,667
|
|
8th July 2011, 04:07 AM | #233 |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 20,632
|
|
8th July 2011, 04:18 AM | #234 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 18,667
|
Aristocracy was stripped of its priviliges 92 years ago in this corner of the world. Most people here have since stopped accepting any pretense of majesticity. Only a few would dream this is a neverending story. A person behaving thus might be called an Empresslike Child
|
8th July 2011, 04:28 AM | #235 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
|
you guys have infinite patience...
|
__________________
|
|
8th July 2011, 05:26 AM | #236 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
|
Oh I love to.....fact is however, Balsammo blocks ANYONE that questions any part of his fantasy. Its quite clear he is just in it for the money. by the way do you still maintain that Morin is an NOC witness? That is just too funny Perhaps you could tell us how the guys at the cemetery could have judged the position of the planes versus the Citgo? Or perhaps you could explain how Turcious could have seen the plane through a canopy and a convenience store and then run to a berm in the few seconds the plane took to fly from the Citgo to the Pentagon? Well can you? |
8th July 2011, 05:35 AM | #237 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
|
|
8th July 2011, 05:36 AM | #238 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
|
|
8th July 2011, 07:24 AM | #239 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
CE, did you forget to spam the mutts' latest latest failure, or have you given up?
I went to report a serious violation to them on their National Security Alert website, but it is still broken. Shaky, The Buffet Slayer and Homeless, these are your heroes? As Cap'n Homeless would say "lol." /by the way, did the mutts ever release their raw videos like they promised? |
8th July 2011, 12:26 PM | #240 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|