If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#251
|
|||
|
|||
lift, wings, and Bernuolli
00:00:00Hg wrote: On Fri, 03 Mar 2006 11:57:05 -0800, george wrote: Gravity seems to work to it's own advantage so it's the ultimate taxing authority in the universe. That really sucks. Air resistance is fricticious I thought resistance was useless. At least for Dent and Ford. I've never sistanced even once |
#252
|
|||
|
|||
lift, wings, and Bernuolli
I asked first.
Ok, vertical momentum of a wing in level flight is zero. Jose -- Money: what you need when you run out of brains. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#253
|
|||
|
|||
lift, wings, and Bernuolli
The hovering spacecraft has zero horizontal and vertical momentum.
It has weight, directed downwards. The engine accelerates mass downward producing an upward force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction to the weight of the spacecraft. This imparts an acceleration to the spacecraft equal in magnitude and opposite in direction from the local acceleration due to gravity. The flying wing has some horizontal momentum which is secondary here, and zero vertical momentum. It also has weight, directed downwards. The wing accelerates mass downward (mass it finds in the air molecules) producing an upward force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction to the weight of the wing (and its presumably attached aircraft. It does so by finding air in front of it, flinging it downwards and forwards (which causes the air in front to try to get out of the way by rising). In the steady state, one can measure high pressure below and low pressure above, but this is just the macroscopic manifestation of the greater number of molecular collisions below, and the lesser number of collisions above. That's what pressure is - we have both agreed on this. The greater number of collisions below imparts an acceleration to the aircraft equal in magnitude and opposite in direction from the local acceleration due to gravity. Unlike the spacecraft (at least to first order), the wing is actually supported by the earth, as the pressure below the wing is higher than it would have been absent the wing's passage, and this higher pressure (spread out over many square miles) pushes down on the earth with a force equal to the weight of the aircraft. Jose -- Money: what you need when you run out of brains. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#254
|
|||
|
|||
lift, wings, and Bernuolli
Air resistance is fricticious
Resistance is futile. Jose -- Money: what you need when you run out of brains. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#255
|
|||
|
|||
lift, wings, and Bernuolli
On Fri, 03 Mar 2006 19:05:18 -0500, Morgans wrote:
"00:00:00Hg" wrote I thought resistance was useless. Nah, it's "resistance is fruitile." g I think I'll have an apple and see if eating it will reveal the secrets of gravity as I gaze at the Moon. |
#256
|
|||
|
|||
lift, wings, and Bernuolli
"00:00:00Hg" wrote I thought resistance was useless. Nah, it's "resistance is fruitile." g -- Jim in NC |
#257
|
|||
|
|||
lift, wings, and Bernuolli
"00:00:00Hg" wrote I think I'll have an apple and see if eating it will reveal the secrets of gravity as I gaze at the Moon. Yeah, but can you tell me the horizontal and vertical components of it's momentum? I was thinking apple, but I need two; I'll have a pear, instead. g -- Jim in NC |
#258
|
|||
|
|||
lift, wings, and Bernuolli
On Fri, 03 Mar 2006 21:06:30 -0500, Morgans wrote:
I think I'll have an apple and see if eating it will reveal the secrets of gravity as I gaze at the Moon. Yeah, but can you tell me the horizontal and vertical components of it's momentum? Not any more, I'll have to pick another. Not the Moon... it has no stem. |
#259
|
|||
|
|||
lift, wings, and Bernuolli
You are looking here at the basic question of how does the
starting vortex form. No, I'm also looking at how it is maintained. You have staked out the position that a ground is required for the vortex to form. No, I've staked out a position that the ground is required for there to be no net momentum change. The ground is ultimately what the air (given downward momentum) bounces against, either for real or by proxy. Granted this is not what provides lift, but it does provide the ultimate support when the wheels themselves leave the ground. Do we agree or disagree that the "wave" i.e. starting vortex, however it got started can continue in the absence of the ground? We agree. I do not see however how it can continue in the absence of energy, and I still maintain that in order to cancel out mv^2/2 of the wing (which otherwise would be falling), there has to be (locally) an equal mv^2/2 which the air acquires, and spreads out over the surface of the earth (where it bounces off, keeping the earth away). Like a dribbler who supports himself by dribbling, there is lots of momentum transfer (to the ball, back and forth), which, while it nets to zero, only does so because of the earth. IF there were no earth, the ball would never bounce back. That is not the same as what you seem to think I am maintaining: that without a ground an infinite wing would require a constant input of infinite energy to accelerate the air and give it momentum (and kinetic energy) for the uncanceled downwash. Jose -- Money: what you need when you run out of brains. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#260
|
|||
|
|||
lift, wings, and Bernuolli
An object moving through air doesn't cause any significant compression
(change in volume) of the air until its speed gets close to the speed of sound. Is there not a (slight) pressure increase in front of any object, especially a blunt one, moving through the air? (if not, what causes the air to get out of the way, and what causes the breezes as it goes past?) Jose -- Money: what you need when you run out of brains. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
GAO: Electronic Warfa Comprehensive Strategy Needed for Suppressing Enemy | Mike | Naval Aviation | 0 | December 27th 05 06:23 PM |
Washington DC airspace closing for good? | tony roberts | Piloting | 153 | August 11th 05 12:56 AM |
Sport Pilot pilots not insurable? | Blueskies | Piloting | 14 | July 12th 05 05:45 AM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |