Backwash Causes Lift?

On Oct 3, 10:48 pm, wrote:
On Oct 3, 9:26 pm, TheSmokingGnu

wrote:
Le Chaud Lapin wrote:
Yes, I am. It's a combination of many things taking place at once.
Vacuum generation by the forward motion of the wing is one of them.

And the other is the displacement of air downward.

By the bottom part of the wing, right?

Remember, when Newton was talking about the whole action/reaction
thing, he did not say you could arbitrarily define the sources of
forces. He was talking specifically about two objects, A and B, A
generating a force on B, and B generating a reciprocal force on A.

If you have compression under a wing do to extended flaps and laminar
friction of airflow, for example, then the lower surface of the wing
forces air downward, and the air beneath the lower surface forces wing
upward.

If you have have downwash above the wing, the downwash has to be due
to a force acting to move the air downward. I've argued that it is
effectively normal atmospheric pressure, acting against what
effectively becomes a partial vacuum generated by the forward
displacement of the wing, above the wing. Newton did not say that you
could arbitarily say, "Oh, there is some air moving downward, I'll
just pick a convenient reason arbitrarily."

Another way to look at this is to imagine a "level" wing with heavy
flap extension. Have an "air gorilla" move the entire wing forward, in
an abrupt motion, not given air anytime to redistributed. If this is
done, there will be compression beneath the wing, strong at the
boundary of compression, or in the flap pocket. Behind the win (above
it, but behind flaps), there will be ....

a huge void!

Now, if air is suddenly allowed to flow, yes indeed, there would be
downwash above the wing into the void, but the wing itself will not be
causing this downwash. It will be the pressure surrounding the void
causing the downwash. Since the source of movement of this air is not
the wing but the air above it, Newton's law cannot be used will-nilly
to say thay that there was some kind of action, so this must be the
reaction. You have to attribute the forces to their sources.

In this case, someone said Newtons law had to be use under penalty of
death, it would be simple:

Take a thin layer or air right at the boundary between the void and
ambient air. If another thin layer of ambient air pushes against this
thin layer, the thin layer will will push back against the ambient
thin layer. This is reciprocity of forces. The reason that the first
thin layer "loses" the pushing battle is because there nothing to
oppose the first thin layer as it moves into the void. The molecules
of the second thin layer has its friends to contend with. After the
first thin layer has moved into the void, those molecules can no
longer participate in pushing at the ambient air (because they have
assumed new position in space - neither air nor people are
telekinetic) and thus we get air flow.

Of course, there are not layers, but a distribution of momentum of the
particles, but this is close enough.

So in summary, downwash cause by high ambient pressure confronting a
void must not be used to contribute to lifting force of the wing. One
_can_ say that the pressure under the wing see no opposing force in
the relative void above the wing does result in net upward force.

-Le Chaud Lapin-