Why airplanes taxi

Dudley Henriques wrote:
wrote:
On Feb 6, 12:06 pm, Tina wrote:
Gee, where would the energy come from to cause the acceleration?


Same place everything Anthony posts comes from, straight out of his
ass.

There is indeed an argument to be made for this post posterior
postulation post haste.

Assuming Mxsmanic on roller blades and a smooth surface, both Newton and
Chef Boy Ardee do theoretically address the possibility that eating X
amount of baked beans can be translated into Y amount of posterior
acceleration...considering the friction of the roller blades on the
surface and the opening size of Mxsmanic's posterior orifice of course.
I think the Calculus works.; Not at all sure about Mxsmanic however, as
I understand he doesn't work.

[*phlbbbbt* *splutter* *splat*]

Rats...time to get another keyboard. This one has chocolate malt
all over it.

Airplanes taxi to get from one side of the airport to the other, much
like the chicken crossing the road.

writes:

Since there is no infinite volume, what would be the point?

The atmosphere of the Earth is an infinite volume, and in fact it demonstrates
rather well that the combined laws don't apply in that case. Pressure is
largely uncorrelated with temperature, for example.

On Feb 10, 5:53*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
Since there is no infinite volume, what would be the point?

The atmosphere of the Earth is an infinite volume, and in fact it demonstrates
rather well that the combined laws don't apply in that case. *Pressure is
largely uncorrelated with temperature, for example.

Go back to the post you originally made the riduculous comment on and
tell us why

D =PM/ RT does not apply in the Earths atmosphere for any given local
measurement of pressure and temperature.
Terry

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Since there is no infinite volume, what would be the point?

The atmosphere of the Earth is an infinite volume, and in fact it demonstrates
rather well that the combined laws don't apply in that case. Pressure is
largely uncorrelated with temperature, for example.

Neither the atmosphere of the Earth nor the universe are infinite.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Feb 10, 5:53*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
Since there is no infinite volume, what would be the point?

The atmosphere of the Earth is an infinite volume, and in fact it demonstrates
rather well that the combined laws don't apply in that case. *Pressure is
largely uncorrelated with temperature, for example.

Half knowledge can be a dangerous thing in the wrong hands. The fact
that you cannot correlate pressure and temperature in the atmosphere
does not mean the gas laws do not apply. It just means that the
number of molecules in a given volume of the atmophere , ie density
varies with height with time, with winds etc. At any point in the
atmosphere ( or in space) the density of any block of space over which
the temperature and pressure can be considered to be constant, can be
calculated accurately using the gas equation

density =PM/RT

You see the fact that the volume of the atmophere or of space is
infinite is quite irrelvant because nobody wants to know what the
average density of the whole atmophere is ( which of course will
approach zero depending on your definition of where the atmsophere
actually ends) . But a pilot might want to know what the density is
in a particular layer of air where the temperature and pressure are
reasonably constant, say at an airport for example that he is going to
take off from and wants to know whether his aircrafts performance will
be sufficient to takeoff and clear a bunch of trees at the end of the
runway.

And in the case of the space example, you quoted a pressure of 1e-11
Pa, if the temperature is 3 deg C then again the density will be able
to be calculated perfectly well for that part of space for which that
temp and pressure apply, the fact that the temperature and pressure in
some other part of infinite space is different,is irrelevant , the gas
laws apply everywhere ( with appropriate modifications for non ideal
behaviour at very high temps and pressures but I wouldnt worry about
those if I were you, try to understand the basics first)
Terry
PPL Downunder
.

On Feb 10, 5:00*pm, Bob Noel
wrote:
In article ,

*WingFlaps wrote:
It would take infinite amount of energy to accelerate any non-zero
mass to the speed of light.

Ah an oft stated idea but why? Is E not 0.5MC^2 ?

reaching way way Way WAY back into college physics *let's see if I remember
this correctly... because mass increases with velocity. * If pressed, I may
even be able to find the formula in my quantum text.


Yes, that's it and the mass is "relativistic". No quantum theories
needed. The idea is that mass and energy are the same thing, so as you
accumulate velocity mass goes up so it takes more and more energy to
accelerate. Strangley, there's no reason why you can't go faster than
light (v=c is the only forbidden velocity) and in that universe MX
becomes impresses us more and more with every post while Dudley and
the rest of us forget how to fly... Now there's a thought.

Cheers

On Feb 10, 7:53*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:


The atmosphere of the Earth is an infinite volume, and in fact it demonstrates
rather well that the combined laws don't apply in that case. *Pressure is
largely uncorrelated with temperature, for example.

So how do you explain the rather well known lapse rate?

Cheers

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

WingFlaps writes:

All the gas laves can be combined to:

PV=nRT and this is true everywhere. It's an energy equation and so can
be applied to any volume.

Set V to infinity (an unconfined gas) and solve for the rest.


Bwawahwhahwahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhhswhahw hahwhahwhahwh!


Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

writes:

Since there is no infinite volume, what would be the point?

The atmosphere of the Earth is an infinite volume, and in fact it
demonstrates rather well that the combined laws don't apply in that
case. Pressure is largely uncorrelated with temperature, for example.


Nope


Bertie