MouthBusters

[QUALTHWAR]

Hey, that mythbuster show is getting ready to come on. I want to restate what I said so since that stuff got lost:

I said that they would not be able to do the experiment “as advertised.” In other words, they can’t control a conveyor belt to adjust exactly (simultaneously) to an increase or decrease in speed.

I said there was 3 ways to look at this scenario and I responded to 007Mike saying that they will probably do the middle scenario I mentioned. The middle scenario is where if the plane is moving 1 mph forwards, the conveyor will move 1 mph backwards, but that still gives the plane a forward speed of 1mph. extrapolate that and the plane can do 100 mph forwards while the conveyor goes 100 mph backwards.

They can’t really do the experiment as advertised.

 

[Rukee]

They did it to scale and the model plane did take off. Just like the one I did did. Can`t wait to see the full scale attempt.

 

[Rukee]

The full sized plane took off, just like I said it would, they even said he accelerated the conveyor well faster then the 25mph take off speed, floored it is what he said?
Confirmed, Myth Busted! And when explaining why it`s busted, they just restated everything I`ve been saying....the plane doesn`t use it`s wheels to take off, it uses thrust from the propeller.

 

[QUALTHWAR]

Well, the show is over and I’m going to say that Rukee tentatively won this one, in the way the experiment was conducted. But the show presented the scenario differently than the initial post by Rukee. All they said on the show was that the plane takeoff speed and the conveyor speed matches.

That’s was what I said would happen in the second scenario where the forward speed matches the reverse speed. I think I commented something like: “What’s the point? If the plane is allowed to go 1 mph forwards, then it might as well go 100 mph forward.

The bottom line is that they can’t really do the experiment as Rukee posted. You can only do it as a “thought experiment” as Einstein used to do. The laugh came from them trying to use a toy plane on a conveyor belt where inertia is almost completely taken out of the equation. even their “full-scale setup” was disturbing when you consider the plane weighed about 300 pounds. Something tells me this one will be hammered on the fan site and may have to be revisited, or at least clarified.

 

[Rukee]

They did do it as described. They found the take off speed of the plane to = 25 mph, and then they pulled the treadmill starting out at 25mph and then accelerated it faster from there, far faster then the plane was going, and the plane still took off. They couldn`t have done it any better. It was conclusive.

 

[UBerserker]

This is the continuation of that long scientific thread?!?

Runs.

 

[Sir_Brizz]

Well, the show is over and I’m going to say that Rukee tentatively won this one, in the way the experiment was conducted. But the show presented the scenario differently than the initial post by Rukee. All they said on the show was that the plane takeoff speed and the conveyor speed matches.

That’s was what I said would happen in the second scenario where the forward speed matches the reverse speed. I think I commented something like: “What’s the point? If the plane is allowed to go 1 mph forwards, then it might as well go 100 mph forward.

The bottom line is that they can’t really do the experiment as Rukee posted. You can only do it as a “thought experiment” as Einstein used to do. The laugh came from them trying to use a toy plane on a conveyor belt where inertia is almost completely taken out of the equation. even their “full-scale setup” was disturbing when you consider the plane weighed about 300 pounds. Something tells me this one will be hammered on the fan site and may have to be revisited, or at least clarified.

The fact that the plane takes off when it's going less than a quarter of the speed of the opposite force proves it.

 

[[VaLkyR]Anubis]

The Mythbuster show is quite funny and good,sometimes they have really crazy ideas and how they wanna make it,man that's just crazy,but cool,hehe.I liked it to watch the series in the past,but now there is always the same stuff on TV and it gets a little bit boring and I don't watch very often TV anyway.=]

 

[Rukee]

It`s on u-tube already, though I wish they included the commentary at the end.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSBFQOfas60&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbRcg3ji_Pc

Read some of the responces to those videos.

 

[QUALTHWAR]

Well, I found at least three things troubling about the scenario:

The plane was really rolling against the road. There was a sheet of something sandwiched between the plane and the road, but think about it: the weight of the plane is actually pushing right through the tarp and onto the road. It’s like if someone was running on the tarp and it was moving, each step the person takes, they will actually be putting their weight on the road and pushing off of that. So the plane wasn’t actually freewheeling on a conveyor belt. I’m not saying the plane was pushing off of the road, but that it was rolling along the road.

The second thing was they found the takeoff speed of the plane, but the plane can obviously move faster than 25 mph. The guy said he just gunned the truck, but I never heard him say he went way over 25, but maybe he did. But the point is, if the plane can do 75 along the ground and is dragged backwards at 25, then the plane still has 50 mph of forward speed it can use.

What they should have done was drag the tarp at 10 mph and see if the plane can remain stationary; Then 25 and see if the plane would stay stationary relative to a bystander. We don’t know if the guy put the plane at full throttle or just enough throttle to make the plane roll along at 25. I didn’t hear them say. But then we're back to the problem of the plane not really freewheeling on a conveyor.

The last thing was they didn’t speak with someone like an MIT professor, and maybe someone from CAL-TECH about this scenario. In fact, I assumed they would have someone like that commenting on all this like they do with other things. It almost seemed like they didn’t want that included in the show.

Anyway, they will probably get some flack over some of the stuff I brought up, but they can’t really do the experiment like the first scenario I was debating. That’s why I said they will do something like what they did, and I said “what’s the point” because we all know the outcome.

 

[haarg]

The question as it is usually phased isn't specific enough for there to be only one scenario and one answer.

 

[Rukee]

Well, I found at least three things troubling about the scenario:

The plane was really rolling against the road. There was a sheet of something sandwiched between the plane and the road, but think about it: the weight of the plane is actually pushing right through the tarp and onto the road. It’s like if someone was running on the tarp and it was moving, each step the person takes, they will actually be putting their weight on the road and pushing off of that. So the plane wasn’t actually freewheeling on a conveyor belt. I’m not saying the plane was pushing off of the road, but that it was rolling along the road.

The second thing was they found the takeoff speed of the plane, but the plane can obviously move faster than 25 mph. The guy said he just gunned the truck, but I never heard him say he went way over 25, but maybe he did. But the point is, if the plane can do 75 along the ground and is dragged backwards at 25, then the plane still has 50 mph of forward speed it can use.

What they should have done was drag the tarp at 10 mph and see if the plane can remain stationary; Then 25 and see if the plane would stay stationary relative to a bystander. We don’t know if the guy put the plane at full throttle or just enough throttle to make the plane roll along at 25. I didn’t hear them say. But then we're back to the problem of the plane not really freewheeling on a conveyor.

The last thing was they didn’t speak with someone like an MIT professor, and maybe someone from CAL-TECH about this scenario. In fact, I assumed they would have someone like that commenting on all this like they do with other things. It almost seemed like they didn’t want that included in the show.

Anyway, they will probably get some flack over some of the stuff I brought up, but they can’t really do the experiment like the first scenario I was debating. That’s why I said they will do something like what they did, and I said “what’s the point” because we all know the outcome.

Give it up! You`re joking right?? You graduated where?? Seriously, I`d write them and ask how it is possable you could have granduated and yet not understand how a plane can take off regardless if it`s on a treadmil or not.
Watch this demonstration, you can see that once the planes rolling resistance is overcome the treadmill speed makes no difference to the plane AT ALL. Hell, even the 8yr old kid understands the physics working!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EopVDgSPAk&feature=related
Here`s an even better demonstration.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4owlyCOzDiE&feature=related

 

[Sarevok]

All the experts on physics here lost to Rukee. LLLLLOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLOOOLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!11111111

 

[Sir_Brizz]

Give it up! You`re joking right?? You graduated where?? Seriously, I`d write them and ask how it is possable you could have granduated and yet not understand how a plane can take off regardless if it`s on a treadmil or not.
Watch this demonstration, you can see that once the planes rolling resistance is overcome the treadmill speed makes no difference to the plane AT ALL. Hell, even the 8yr old kid understands the physics working!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EopVDgSPAk&feature=related
Here`s an even better demonstration.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4owlyCOzDiE&feature=related

That second one is a better example than you will ever find that this myth is BUSTED.

 

[GoAt]

yes, once the plane overcomes the friction of the ground, all it cares about at that point is the amount of air it needs to move in order to generate thrust and lift.


regardless of what the belt is doing, if the plane is held in a stationary position, the only thing it needs to worry about is the air.
Now, if the belt is moving at mach 2, and the plane is moving with it, then you might have issues.

 

[Continuum]

They need to take that show off the air... a tarp behind a pickup? lol

 

[QUALTHWAR]

The question as it is usually phased isn't specific enough for there to be only one scenario and one answer.

I had 3 main scenarios I discussed and said that they can’t really do scenario one. I said they would probably end up doing scenario two.

The differences were your interpretation of the conveyor exactly matching the speed of the plane. In scenario two, if the conveyor was moving 25 mph backwards, the plane was moving 25 mph forwards relative to a bystander on the ground. I said what’s the point? If the plane on the show needs 25 mph to take off and it’s moving 25 mph forwards while the conveyor moves 25 mph backwards, then it’s going to take off because it has the speed it needs to take off. That’s why i said what’s the point of even doing the experiment.

What I wanted to see was something robust like this: You actually have a heavy plane (not some 300 lb thing) on a real conveyor belt. The weight is important because of the law of inertia. The conveyor is motorized, not some stupid tarp you pull along the back of a truck. You use something like a laser to detect any attempt at forward motion by the plane and as soon as any attempt is detected, you move the conveyor in the opposite direction to match the speed of the plane.

A scenario like that is meaningful, unlike the half-ass thing they did on the show. You can pretty much engineer anything, but cost usually limits us. That’s what happened with the show. It would have taken the budget of several seasons to do the experiment like I proposed. Then you don’t just do it once, but you repeat the experiment over and over to get a reliable “result set.” That wasn’t done.

 

[QUALTHWAR]

Give it up! You`re joking right?? You graduated where?? Seriously, I`d write them and ask how it is possable you could have granduated and yet not understand how a plane can take off regardless if it`s on a treadmil or not.
Watch this demonstration, you can see that once the planes rolling resistance is overcome the treadmill speed makes no difference to the plane AT ALL. Hell, even the 8yr old kid understands the physics working!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EopVDgSPAk&feature=related
Here`s an even better demonstration.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4owlyCOzDiE&feature=related

I can’t watch any utube stuff; I’ve never been able to. I get an error saying I need to download something or whatever. It’s probably flash or something. I’m not installing flash because I don’t need to see distracting animation or sounds while I’m trying to read something on a site.

You know, I’m the only one here with the intelligence to not just except something “as is.” I brought up some very valid points but you ignore those and try to belittle me. you would suck as a scientist. Science is about experimentation without bias. It’s about doing the experiment over and over to get a good result set. It’s about trying to break your experiment to find flaws, and have others try the same experiment to either confirm, find issues, or improve things.

I said I was tentatively saying you won, but that’s because I don’t have time type 20,000 words trying to explain things to lesser mortals. I said they would end up doing scenario two, but they didn’t even do a good job with that. They freakin’ half-assed the experiment because they don’t have the means to do it with a large plane on a real conveyor that is motorized and designed to match the speed of the plane.

Every flaw I mentioned in their methods makes a valid point, but you choose to ignore that. Did you see a plane on a conveyor belt? You did? When, where? Maybe I was in the bathroom at the time. The plane didn’t freewheel on anything. It basically rolled along the road like it always does. Where was the part with the conveyor belt exactly matching the speed of the plane? Hmmm, I was probably in the bathroom or pissing on Roy the plant. Learn to question. That’s the starting point for being a good scientist. You ever see them redoing experiments? I wonder why? Because they **** up. they aren’t really scientists or experimentalists; they are engineers who have built crap for tv shows and commercials.

None of this has anything to do with who is right or wrong. I said the way they will do the experiment will cause the plane to take off. I was right, you were right. It has to do with how you envision the experiment being conducted. Most everyone envisioned scenario two, which is a joke; why even bother. We will never know the outcome of my proposed scenario one unless someone actually attempts it.

If you want to have an “intelligent” discussion about things, I’m in, but this 7-year-old stuff is kinda stupid.

 

[QUALTHWAR]

All the experts on physics here lost to Rukee. LLLLLOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLOOOLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!11111111

read the posts i just made

 

[Rukee]

We all have to admit we`re wrong from time to time. How you do it defines your character.
I question whether you really do have a B.S. Masters in Physics. Unless the B.S. stands for something else or you got it on line or somethin. More typing doesn`t make you right either. You can`t write a 20,000 word essay here for extra credit to make up for the wrong answer to begin with. This is the most basic of physics at work. The ONLY force you have holding the plane back to keep it in one place on the treadmill is the rolling resistance of the wheels. Increasing the wheel speed does not increase the resistance! The other force is the thrust created by the propeller working against the air, once it has created enough thrust to overcome the rolling resistance of the wheels it doesn`t matter if the wheels are doing 5mph on the treadmill or 40mph on the treadmill. It doesn`t require anymore thrust at 5 then it does at 40 the it does at 60mph treadmill speed.
The rolling resistance of the wheels does not change with the speed of the plane or the treadmill. So as long as the plane`s thrust is greater then the rolling resistance of the wheels the plane moves forward, regardless of the wheel or treadmill speed. And the plane was 400lbs plus the pilot, the motor was 300lbs.
Seriously, who was your professor at SFU?? I wanna write him myself!