View Single Post
  #141   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
Clive George Clive George is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,580
Default OT Here is an example of pseudo science.

On 01/10/2010 13:24, dennis@home wrote:


"Clive George" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 30/09/2010 22:43, dennis@home wrote:


"Rick Cavallaro" wrote in message
...

On Sep 30, 1:31 pm, Clive George wrote:

I've got a little car, with 6 wheels - 4 straddling the belt, 2 on
the belt.

Can I arrange a drive mechanism such that my little car can go faster
than the conveyor belt? (no engines, stored energy, etc, just simple
mechanical connections)

(actually, this is all quite like the various cotton reel problems
covered in 1st year physics)

Spool video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7vcQcIaWSQ

Under the ruler faster than the ruler:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-trDF8Yldc

Equivalence of reference frames:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Yt4zxYuPzI



What is that supposed to demonstrate?
that if you pull the centre along it goes faster because of the gearing
between the centre and the edge?
that's all it does show.


Yes, and that's all it does need to show.

So you agree that yes, I can have that drive mechanism, and it can be
as simple as eg having a a 2:1 chain drive such that the wheels on the
conveyor belt go half the speed of those on the road?


That is easy, nobody has argued against it.
The arguments against have always been deflected onto something else in
all the replies in case you had not noticed.


I'm not doing any deflecting. I'm taking you through it, slowly and
carefully.

Like the one about the treadmill demonstrating the required effect..
it doesn't, all it shows is you can take power from the belt to drive a
prop with enough thrust to power the cart faster than the belt.
It doesn't show that you can extract energy from wind and use the same
energy to go faster than that wind.

Even the main video doesn't actually show that, it doesn't even show
they are going downwind, the wind vanes show the apparent wind and not
the true wind so they could be going at an angle and the wind vanes
would not show that.


Can you stick with my argument, rather than starting your own? You're
introducing confusion into the discussion which isn't helping.

Now with that arrangement, what can you tell me about the forces the
wheels/axles are exerting on a) the road, b) the conveyor belt and c)
my little car? Relative magnitude and direction will do.


What will that prove that has any relevance to going down wind faster
than the wind?
Is this just another deflection attempt?


No, it's a step along the way to explaining it to you.

Can you answer my questions?