Brain Teaser

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by csmguitarman, Oct 25, 2007.

  1. goyleinlove

    goyleinlove New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Messages:
    402
    Likes Received:
    0
    It goes back reality: we do not live in a friction free society. The op had no menton of ice being used. Therefor the wheels MUST be on the ground, which blows the theory to bits.
  2. goyleinlove

    goyleinlove New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Messages:
    402
    Likes Received:
    0
    Additionally, there is still no motion to create lift regardless of whether they are wheels or ice. If the are both moving the same speed in opposite directions it is moot.
  3. csmguitarman

    csmguitarman New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2007
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    0
    the ice is an analogy for what the wheels do when they are on the ground. are you in 3rd grade. You never read what i have to say because your rebuttles never match what i say
  4. csmguitarman

    csmguitarman New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2007
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    0
    so you are telling me a plane with no wheels and ice in between the plane and treadmill wont move forward.
  5. csmguitarman

    csmguitarman New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2007
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am refferencing a post you made a while back. You didnt read my roller blade analogy. I said you were not standing on the treadmill. You are standing on the floor. can you not move me forward?
  6. goyleinlove

    goyleinlove New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Messages:
    402
    Likes Received:
    0
    That isn't what I said. I am saying the if the planeis moving at ten miles an hour with anything as the catalyst (wheels or ice) and the conveyer below is also moving ten miles an hour that the damn plane will not move. It will remain stationary.

    I haven't felt the need torefute most of your individual posts because they all say the same thing with the same wrong conclusion.

    I have stated several times to look at the original question. I still don't think you have. because the plane is on the ground, if it is moving in one direction, so are it's wheels. As soon as the conveyer matches the planes speed they void one another.

    I have stated this several times and you have NEVER disputed it because it is correct.

    Before you throw accusations that your meandering posts aren't being read you should buy a vowel.

    You have consistently gotten rude throughout this thread when there is no need for that. The OP, which is what I have responded to since day one, is a bad representation of what I think you are trying to 'prove.'
  7. csmguitarman

    csmguitarman New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2007
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    0
    I dispute this everytime i post. READ. they cannot cancel each other out. A plane pushes of air not off its wheels. IT ROLLS ON ITS WHEELS. Its forward movement is a relationship between it and the air. So as long as the wheels are traveling at least the speed of the plane they ar not holding the plane back. The plane is moving over the top of the wheels, taking them with the plane. You are still treating the plane like a car.

    The speeds between the plane and treadmill are NOT cancled out. The ice and wheels are not a catalyst they are an anti-catalyst. If the the ice between the plane and tread mill is not moving how is the plane being held from forward movement.
  8. csmguitarman

    csmguitarman New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2007
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    0
    How would you word the question to what i am trying to prove.
  9. csmguitarman

    csmguitarman New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2007
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    0
    If the plane is attatched to the wheels, and the planes forward movement make the wheels move as a result, then how can something NOT attached to the wheels take over control of the wheels.

    BTW i have read the OP. i friggen wrote it. It states that the treadmill and plane match speed. you have to understand that that relationship is different if it were a car on the treadmill.

    Cars apply force to the gound.
    Planes apply force to the air. PERIOD on ground or in air.
  10. goyleinlove

    goyleinlove New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Messages:
    402
    Likes Received:
    0
    There you go getting upset again. Calm down.

    I'll talk slowly. I do not dispute that if a plne (already traveling at speed=X) went onto a conveyer that the conveyer wouldn't affect the flight.

    However, you said a plane moving at X on a belt moving at X. By not stating that the plane was previously in motion you nullify the result. If Plane (p) is moving at speed X, and conveyer (c) is also moving at X, starting at the same time, pX will always be equal to cX.

    If a plane is stationary on a conveyer and you start the conveyer, will the plane move? Of course it will, the plane isn't just going to sit there while he wheels roll just because the wheels aren't driven.

    The logic you are applying contradicts that.
  11. goyleinlove

    goyleinlove New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Messages:
    402
    Likes Received:
    0
    But planes DO apply force to the ground, just not in the same way. They apply force in weight. They don't apply thrust to the ground, they apply it to air.
  12. goyleinlove

    goyleinlove New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Messages:
    402
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry for multiple posting but I a on my Q and don't see some posts efore I submit because I am in edit mode.

    To answer your last request of how I would word the question. Most of the qestion is fine. I would change it to state hat he plane was previously in motion (making the conveyer ineffective and not affecting he overall motion of the plane.)

    I wouldn't necessarily include the reasoning I just gave because you obvously don't want to give it away in the question.
  13. csmguitarman

    csmguitarman New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2007
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Exactly. Planes do not apply force to the ground. they ARE forced to the ground. that is gravity. So if a plane was traveling 10mph and it entered on to a trreadmill going 10mph back, you say it wont have affect. so how can it have affect when its starts there. If a car did the same thing it would eventually stop moving forward unlike the plane.
  14. csmguitarman

    csmguitarman New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2007
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    0
  15. goyleinlove

    goyleinlove New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Messages:
    402
    Likes Received:
    0
    In order for the plane to initially move while also being moved backward it would require additional thrust. I understand the difference between a car and a plane. I really do. For one thing, the car isn't trying to gain flight so it isn't a great metaphor. I do get what you're saying and I'm pretty sure I have filledthe loopholes to allow my brain to wrap around it, but I still dispute the original post and answer to it based on the variables and wording that was presented.
  16. goyleinlove

    goyleinlove New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Messages:
    402
    Likes Received:
    0
    In the equation X does not equal X. But you changed a variable fro my original equation. That equation was based on duplicating speeds by c and p. If c and p both equal X, they both equal X.
  17. csmguitarman

    csmguitarman New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2007
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    0
    I guess you really dont get the difference between the plane and car. for a car to out move the treadmill it WHEELS (being driven by the motor) have to move faster than the treadmill. A plane doesnt since it it not driving the wheels it is driving the air.

    Why do jet powered drag cars lack traction issue that wheel power drag cars do?

    I am done with this! EVERYONE else has changed FROM your thoughts TO mine because the get it. I am not wasting anymore time trying to get through to you because you arent getting it. you come up with some mal-connected counter theory. watch myth busters Dec. 12. I have seen the shows results. and soon you will too.

    This will be my last effort.

    Both plane and treadmill are "off"= no wheel speed

    Both plane and treadmill move equal forward=no wheels speed and no extra speed of plane

    Both plane and treadmill equal in opposite direction= no EXTRA plane speed and twice as fast wheels speed.


    BTW congrats on your Sox. they played a heck of a post season
  18. MBK2

    MBK2 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2007
    Messages:
    2,553
    Likes Received:
    0
    OK..

    The plane with the free-flying helicopter hovering in place and the 100 ft rope tensioned tight and the plane with the helicopter mounted onto the plane itself ...were both sitting stationary on the same non-moving treadmill...

    Now that treadmill starts up in reverse...do both planes still remain in the same spot?
  19. MBK2

    MBK2 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2007
    Messages:
    2,553
    Likes Received:
    0

    Csmguitarman...If you see this, answer the qestion above.

    The plane with the helicopter mounted on it would go in reverse with the treadmill would it not....while the plane that is tethered to a free-flying helicopter will be held in place by that helicopter kinda like an anchor.

    If the two are supposedly the same, then why is the plane with the helicopter mounted onto the plane moving in reverse with the treadmill??
  20. csmguitarman

    csmguitarman New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2007
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    0
    what does the legth of the connection have to do with whether or not the the plane moves backward. Whether or not there is a rope between them or they are welded together. THEY ARE STILL CONNECTED

Share This Page