This is physics at its worst. Stupid, inconsequential, and badly worded. Its like asking a 4 year old to describe gravity. They might come upn with an answer, but it will never be right.
Riddle Me This.....Before My Brain Implodes!
- Thread starter Deathmaker
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
shadow_dragon
is ironing his panties!
BobCobb said:
It's not badly worded at all. It's a trick, it's whole purpose is to confuse people into thinking the wrong answer. It does it by phrasing the question cleverly.
It's not a physics question, it is a trick question.
geogob
Koohii o nomimasu ka?
Well, it's always easy to trick someone into thinking something when they have no idea what you are talking about.
This thread shows how many people have no understanding of very basic concepts of physics. This is not bad, as it's just not something for everyone to understand, nor something for everyone to debate (of the same reason I stay out of politics
).
This question only shows that when you don't know what you are talking about and you are trying to guess an answer, you'll say things that makes no sense... that without any surprise.
[OT: someone stole my avatar bad bad bad. I should visit BUF OT more often]
This thread shows how many people have no understanding of very basic concepts of physics. This is not bad, as it's just not something for everyone to understand, nor something for everyone to debate (of the same reason I stay out of politics
).This question only shows that when you don't know what you are talking about and you are trying to guess an answer, you'll say things that makes no sense... that without any surprise.
[OT: someone stole my avatar
bad bad bad. I should visit BUF OT more often]
Last edited:
Wow, this was quite an interesting read, tricked me in the beginning too, but now I know that the plane would indeed take off.
Once you think about it, you realize that it's not rocket surgery.
The belt moving in the opposite direction of the plane's wheels does nothing more than make the wheels spin foward at the same speed. So, assuming that the prop/jet engine of the plane is not on and something is holding the plane still, this is equivalent to holding a matchbox car on your moving treadmill.
The whole point of the planes wheels is to eliminate friction and allow it to gain the velocity relative to the (non-moving) ground to take off. With this conveyor belt situation, there is no friction, because no matter how fast the damn belt moves, the wheels will move at the exact same speed in the opposite direction. So ground friction is eliminated, and the wheels are taken out of the equation. It's as if the plane is floating in the air now.
So now you have to factor in the force of the prop/jet engine. Let's just assume that it's a prop plane. The prop "screws" into the air providing a pulling force that has nothing to do with the wheels or the ground.. Again, there is zero ground friction so we can just assume that the plane is floating in air as I said before. This pulling force is allows the plane to gain velocity and therefore take off. Going back to the matchbox car analogy, this is equivalent to tying a string to the front of the matchbox car while it is on the moving treadmill, and then pulling on it. The car moves foward!
And........ We have liftoff.
Once you think about it, you realize that it's not rocket surgery.
The belt moving in the opposite direction of the plane's wheels does nothing more than make the wheels spin foward at the same speed. So, assuming that the prop/jet engine of the plane is not on and something is holding the plane still, this is equivalent to holding a matchbox car on your moving treadmill.
The whole point of the planes wheels is to eliminate friction and allow it to gain the velocity relative to the (non-moving) ground to take off. With this conveyor belt situation, there is no friction, because no matter how fast the damn belt moves, the wheels will move at the exact same speed in the opposite direction. So ground friction is eliminated, and the wheels are taken out of the equation. It's as if the plane is floating in the air now.
So now you have to factor in the force of the prop/jet engine. Let's just assume that it's a prop plane. The prop "screws" into the air providing a pulling force that has nothing to do with the wheels or the ground.. Again, there is zero ground friction so we can just assume that the plane is floating in air as I said before. This pulling force is allows the plane to gain velocity and therefore take off. Going back to the matchbox car analogy, this is equivalent to tying a string to the front of the matchbox car while it is on the moving treadmill, and then pulling on it. The car moves foward!
And........ We have liftoff.
The thing is, it doesn't require any knowledge of physics whatsoever. What tricks people (including me initially) into thinking it won't take off is that there is pretty much no other vehicle that this would work for. Anything that's mode of propulsion is based on the ground won't, and most people think in terms relative to the ground since most vehicles are by nature attached to the ground.geogob said:Well, it's always easy to trick someone into thinking something when they have no idea what you are talking about.
This thread shows how many people have no understanding of very basic concepts of physics. This is not bad, as it's just not something for everyone to understand, nor something for everyone to debate (of the same reason I stay out of politics
This question only shows that when you don't know what you are talking about and you are trying to guess an answer, you'll say things that makes no sense... that without any surprise.
[OT: someone stole my avatar
This problem would have been less of a problem if hover cars were around like they should be by now.
You hear that? The thinks he's better than us! Get 'im!Deathmaker said:
Anyways, the amusing/annoying thing here is that the peeps who were wrong do know what they're talking about; they're just more used to driving cars than planes. 'Course, the other side just sort of sees the real problem and doesn't understand the confusion, thus everyone just bounces at each other.
I could run this past a physics prof and I'd get a 50% chance of tripping him up. It just depends on what they're willing to do: assume the question isn't trivial or recognize that the plane is more than just an abstract representation for the sake of describing the problem. In physics, people often use objects as representations of a concept, such as calculating how much energy is used by a sports car. Here, people just assumed that the plane is the same thing as a flying car.
Either way, there's little here to get "holier-art-though" over. Besides, some of the explanations of "oh, it will take off" are just as wacky.
Last edited:
When I first saw your post, I thought I'd posted myself and then forgotten all about it (I've done it before). Also, I didn't know anyone else was using the cat as an avatar. I've had it for maybe a year now. I'd have to look over in the XMP forums to see when Pistos was going on about what exactly the liquid in the glass might be.geogob said:[OT: someone stole my avatar
geogob
Koohii o nomimasu ka?
Double avatar can indeed pose some confusion. With luck, I'll stay around the INF forums without lurking around too much
I can't remember how long I've had this avatar. Not that it's really important.[/offtopic]
I can't remember how long I've had this avatar. Not that it's really important.[/offtopic]
That wasn't what I was implying; really, there are some genuinely funny replies.Airmoran said:
Meh, I thought it was all good natured fun actually.
Good thread.
EDIT: Good find Brizz..
Good thread.
EDIT: Good find Brizz..
Last edited:
I'm sure maybe half of the people in this thread could engage in an intelligent discussion about forces, friction, lift, propulsion, and all that, but there's absolutely no reason to. As many people have stated many times, this isn't a physics question... it's just a trick question that makes you think it's a physics question.geogob said: