I give up, after many, many years!

terry writes:

And yes Anthony , I do arithmetic by
rote. How do you do arithmetic, by first principles?

I've at least examined it theoretically.

Anyway, all the air pressure on our planet results from gravity, not
temperature or confinement or anything else.

On May 31, 5:51*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
terry writes:
And yes Anthony , I do arithmetic by
rote. *How do you do arithmetic, by first principles?

I've at least examined it theoretically.

Anyway, all the air pressure on our planet results from gravity, not
temperature or confinement or anything else.

I dont doubt you analysed it Anthony, but you still havent seen, or
aren't willing to admit , that you had it all wrong. Now what has the
SOURCE of the air pressure got to do with the discussion ? Change of
subject no 3.
Last chance Anthony. Why would the non containment of the atmosphere
prevent the ideal gas law in its form used by me not allow one to
calculate the air density in the vicinity of an airport? That is
what you have stated twice remember Anthony?

terry writes:

I dont doubt you analysed it Anthony, but you still havent seen, or
aren't willing to admit , that you had it all wrong. Now what has the
SOURCE of the air pressure got to do with the discussion?

A great deal. Without gravity, air pressure would be zero, and volume would
be infinite.

On Jun 1, 5:37 am, Mxsmanic wrote:
terry writes:
I dont doubt you analysed it Anthony, but you still havent seen, or
aren't willing to admit , that you had it all wrong. Now what has the
SOURCE of the air pressure got to do with the discussion?

A great deal. Without gravity, air pressure would be zero, and volume would
be infinite.

Well, no. The gas 'laws' are approximations and fail to be predictive
except within certain ranges, just as Newtonian physics are valid only
in certain ranges..

On Jun 1, 3:04 am, Tina wrote:
On Jun 1, 5:37 am, Mxsmanic wrote:

terry writes:
I dont doubt you analysed it Anthony, but you still havent seen, or
aren't willing to admit , that you had it all wrong. Now what has the
SOURCE of the air pressure got to do with the discussion?

A great deal. Without gravity, air pressure would be zero, and volume would
be infinite.

As a student pilot, if you have no gravity, you could
have smaller wings on your airplane, right?

Well, no. The gas 'laws' are approximations and fail to be predictive
except within certain ranges, just as Newtonian physics are valid only
in certain ranges..

Doing wing sectional sims, I used the centrifugal
force of the displaced air over the wing surfaces.
It is a fairly simple algorithm, in accord with physics,
and works surprisingly well.
It also stalls well, since Energy=Force x distance,
and once the airstream kinetic energy is bled off,
the airstream reverses and follows the wing to
give turbulence. Good Stuff.
Ken

Ken S. Tucker writes:

As a student pilot, if you have no gravity, you could
have smaller wings on your airplane, right?

Without gravity, wings serve little purpose.

On Jun 1, 12:07 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Ken S. Tucker writes:
As a student pilot, if you have no gravity, you could
have smaller wings on your airplane, right?

Without gravity, wings serve little purpose.

But you'd still need to steer, right?

On Jun 2, 3:07*am, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

Doing wing sectional sims, I used the centrifugal
force of the displaced air over the wing surfaces.
It is a fairly simple algorithm, in accord with physics,
and works surprisingly well.

A fictional force for a fictional calcullation. Sounds about right.

LOL

Cheers

"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in
:

On Jun 1, 3:04 am, Tina wrote:
On Jun 1, 5:37 am, Mxsmanic wrote:

terry writes:
I dont doubt you analysed it Anthony, but you still havent seen,
or aren't willing to admit , that you had it all wrong. Now what
has the SOURCE of the air pressure got to do with the discussion?

A great deal. Without gravity, air pressure would be zero, and
volume would be infinite.

As a student pilot, if you have no gravity, you could
have smaller wings on your airplane, right?

Well, no. The gas 'laws' are approximations and fail to be predictive
except within certain ranges, just as Newtonian physics are valid
only in certain ranges..

Doing wing sectional sims, I used the centrifugal
force of the displaced air over the wing surfaces.
It is a fairly simple algorithm, in accord with physics,
and works surprisingly well.
It also stalls well, since Energy=Force x distance,
and once the airstream kinetic energy is bled off,
the airstream reverses and follows the wing to
give turbulence. Good Stuff.


Good grief.

Bertie

On Jun 1, 7:37*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
terry writes:
I dont doubt you analysed it Anthony, *but you still havent seen, or
aren't willing to admit , that you had it all wrong. *Now what has the
SOURCE of the air pressure got to do with the discussion?

A great deal. *Without gravity, air pressure would be zero, and volume would
be infinite.

Slithering away again Anthony, what was the real challenge put to
you?