5
   

I don't understand how this car works.

 
 
Robert Gentel
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 05:12 pm
@BillRM,
... and people who don't agree with you about Windows are in bed with Bill Gates (shouldn't it be Balmer?) and so forth.

But it'd be cool to argue against what they say instead of using the guilt by association ploy.
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 05:18 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Yes, I will man up and you are right indeed, you can get energy out of still air and if I were you, I would invest my life savings on such a wonderful technology that this car is just demonstration of.


Dude, the air isn't still. The car does not roll magically and nobody claims it does.

Only you seem to be unable to grasp the physics of the situation... everyone else has gotten on board. You think they are all fools and you are the only intelligent one. But that's a pretty weak stance, Bill, and you should reconsider your hasty words and actually try doing some research on the subject.

Cycloptichorn
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 05:27 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
When you are moving along with the wind you are in still air my friend you could be moving at a ground speed of 300 mph as a passenger of a free balloon in a hurricane and you would be in still air.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 05:34 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

When you are moving along with the wind you are in still air my friend you could be moving at a ground speed of 300 mph as a passenger of a free balloon in a hurricane and you would be in still air.


The air isn't 'still,' Bill. It is moving. You don't have your terms correct.

You may want to argue that the air is still in relation to your relative motion, but that doesn't seem to be what you are saying.

Cycloptichorn
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 05:35 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:
Only you seem to be unable to grasp the physics of the situation... everyone else has gotten on board. You think they are all fools and you are the only intelligent one


I never was one who have some emotional need to join the herd and my opinions and judgments are not driven by what the herd opinion is at any given moment in time.

The laws of nature does not care one little bit either at what the group opinion of them are they are what they are no matter how good the sale person is who had convince the herd they are otherwise then what they are.

Now my opinion of my judgment compare to your well I think you can guess correctly on that subject and for once be right.
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 05:37 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:
I never was one who have some emotional need to join the herd and my opinions and judgments are not driven by what the herd opinion is at any given moment in time.

Your behavior appears quite emotional. I might even say extremely emotional.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 05:47 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
My my we are going to spit hairs are we?

This from a member of a group that can not get the idea that speed and velocity is not the same concept!!!!

How cute can you be?

In any case as far as the person on the balloon is concern it is still air and at any ground speed or no ground speed is not of concern.

Second a windmill on the balloon would be generating zero power in a hurricana.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 05:51 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:

This from a member of a group that can not get the idea that speed and velocity is not the same concept!!!!


What makes you think that I don't know that Speed and Velocity are not the same concept? Or anyone here, for that matter? You keep bringing this up, but you never really mention why.

Quote:

In any case as far as the person on the balloon is concern it is still air


No, it's moving air. Or otherwise the person in the balloon wouldn't be moving. I'm pretty sure they would be concerned by that fact.

How hard is this to understand?

Cycloptichorn
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 05:53 pm
@rosborne979,
Quote:
Your behavior appears quite emotional. I might even say extremely emotional.


I do have an emotional reaction to my fellow humans acting more like herd animals then thinking people.

It is a damn shame and had led to wars and economic meltdowns times after times without end.

We are all in agreement therefore you must be wrong is an argument that I find sad indeed.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 06:01 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Lord the man in the balloon is moving in relationship to everything else in the universe from the moon to the sun to the galaxy center and it does not matter one little bit and he still can not generate power or movement from the wind around him and it is still as far as he is concern.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 06:40 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:

We are all in agreement therefore you must be wrong is an argument that I find sad indeed.


You misunderstand. The argument is that we understand the physics behind it and you do not.

You requested that the math behind it be posted, and this has happened. Are you going to comment on the equations?

You would be more credible if you could actually point out the flaws, rather than just assert over and over again that others are wrong.

Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 06:56 pm
Let's try something different. Are you in agreement that a sail, tacking continuously, will outrun balloons in a similar wind - even accounting for the fact that the ship experiences drag that the balloons are not?

Cycloptichorn
ThinAirDesigns
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 06:57 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:
... you confusing a scalar quantity with a vector quantity time after time.


Bill, time and time again you make this same silly accusation, but not ONCE have you been able to point out the post where I have made such a mistake.

It's time for you to man up and actually back up your empty assertion. Please quote the post where I confuse a scalar quantity with a vector quantity and provide the correct math showing where I want wrong.

Thanks
JB
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 07:04 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
What equations the only equations I seen so far are just the same hand waving and does not address the question as where the hell the force come from when you have no relative air movement.

But feel free to give the perpetual motion equations.

Sorry my friend but this is nonsense of the first order and is interesting that the herd mind some to have taken over completely here.

I am going to look forward to the testing of his free energy car.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 08:02 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:
Are you in agreement that a sail, tacking continuously, will outrun balloons in a similar wind - even accounting for the fact that the ship experiences drag that the balloons are not?


Do I think it is possible not will do so to have an iceboat or very fast sailboat tacking from side to side and to beat a free floating balloon?

Yes and for the same reason as I had said before if you can store energy in some manner you can beat the wind using the wind to do so.

By tacking and therefore maintaining a relative wind for most of it journey you can build up store energy in the form of 1/2mv^2 and then used that energy to form an average vector velocity greater then the wind in the wind direction. You are losing a large amount of energy in changing the velocity vector from side to side but I see no barrier for it being done.

Now take note for this to work you need to go to a great deal of trouble to maintain a relative wind most of the time.

No iceboat or sailboat can just head downwind however and beat the wind and no wind car of the type given can just head downwind and beat the wind either.

For the simple reason that once you reach the wind velocity on the same vector as the wind you have zero relative wind and therefore force and therefore energy to increased the speed over the wind velocity.

Chain driving the prop to the wheels give you nothing in this regard.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Jun, 2010 07:27 am
@Robert Gentel,
Hello Robert it is fun to have someone who have no interest at all in the subject of this thread come here just to try to take a knock at little old me.

Time on your hands or just a little bored dear Robert?

0 Replies
 
ThinAirDesigns
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Jun, 2010 08:47 am
BillRM wrote:
... you confusing a scalar quantity with a vector quantity time after time.


{Second request}

Bill, time and time again you make this same silly accusation, but not ONCE have you been able to point out the post and demonstrate where I have made such a mistake.

It's time for you to man up and actually back up your empty assertion. Please quote the post where I confuse a scalar quantity with a vector quantity and provide the correct math showing where I went wrong.

Thanks
JB
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Jun, 2010 12:18 pm
@ThinAirDesigns,
You do like to do your very very best to get us all off onto side issues such as iceboats and sailboats and my comments concerning your efforts to be as confusing as possible with your terms.

As life is short and I need to get back to two programming projects let instead focus on no matter how you wave your hands in the air that with zero relative winds how you can still somehow get force and therefore energy out of your little wind car.

No relative wind over your car mean no force on your car from the wind and as a result no ability to add any more velocity over that of the velocity of the wind.

Let see there is some magic with the chaining between the prop and the wheels and also some magic with the prop pitch correct?

Sorry if there is no air movement from the wind over the prop that is part of the wind car neither the pitch or driving the prop from the momentum of the car by way of the wheels is going to add energy and velocity to the car.

You had created one hell of a cute perpetual motion wind-car it would seem and with no relative wind you would need a Maxwell demon to draw energy out of the heat in the air as you are not going to do so from any wind when moving along at the same vector and velocity of that wind.
0 Replies
 
ThinAirDesigns
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Jun, 2010 12:41 pm
BillRM wrote:
... you confusing a scalar quantity with a vector quantity time after time.


{THIRD request}

Bill, time and time again you make this same silly accusation, but not ONCE have you been able to point out the post and demonstrate where I have made such a mistake.

It's time for you to man up and actually back up your empty assertion. Please quote the post where I confuse a scalar quantity with a vector quantity and provide the correct math showing where I went wrong.

Thanks
JB
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Jun, 2010 01:02 pm
@ThinAirDesigns,
Still trying to get into side issues once more and it I was you that what I would be doing also.

I am going to look forward to this Four of July when your group according to you is going have your car tested by the Nalsa or more to the point when their report of this test is released.

Note I could not find one mention of this upcoming test on their website and that does seem somewhat strange.



 

Related Topics

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 11/25/2024 at 11:30:11