General > General Technical Chat

Force multiplier

<< < (33/71) > >>

electrodacus:

--- Quote from: HuronKing on February 09, 2023, 02:05:07 am ---
--- Quote from: electrodacus on February 09, 2023, 01:52:32 am ---It seems your ability to make jokes (a joke) is at least as bad as your understanding of physics (your inability to take the joke). :)

I'm trying to explain this highschool level physics for the past few months and I do not longer find anything funny.

--- End quote ---

Look, bro, some advice. Maybe I completely agree with you (I don't, but you're an expert at thought experiments so pretend I do). I made a joke about the fact that every couple months you start one of these threads and, pretty unanimously, the board disagrees with you every... single... time.

Now, the joke here is that this thread is called "force multiplier" so it appears that one poster (you) is able to conjure up some pretty remarkable reactionary forces out of proportion to their size despite how many times this topic has been hashed, rehashed, triple hashed, and no one is convinced by you.

Now remember, in this thought experiment, we are pretending I think you're absolutely right. So, my understanding of physics would be on par with yours.

But instead, you instantly turn towards calling me an idiot without even knowing what I think about you, or your arguments. All I said is its funny how strong a reaction you get... every single time. Force multiplier? Get it? Do you get it?

And there is an extra joke there - that you might have called someone who agrees with you an idiot for agreeing with you. So that makes you an idiot too, right?  >:D

So,
1) You're incapable of understanding I was making a pretty obvious joke given you tried to lecture me without even pausing to recognize the absurdity of this thread and the last... 3 threads there have been on this?
2) You're incapable of taking a joke that might even peripherally be at your expense.
3) You're incapable of even recognizing that turning towards calling people idiots without even knowing their opinions of your physics will just make people plain not like you - even if they agree with you.
4) You're incapable of explaining high school physics.

I've been a teacher for 10 years and a tutor for almost 20. You are really, really bad at teaching. And if this isn't fun or interesting or engaging for you... you can just stop. That's the advice.

But you might also be incapable of that.  :-X

--- End quote ---

I have periods when I'm quite busy with my own business so yes there were multiple times when I tried to explain and needed to give up because I no longer had the time to waste.

I see what your view was but this simple problem wrongly understood has huge implications in all fields of engineering and science.
I'm not a physicist and I'm not enjoying explaining this (not am I good at explaining) but I do not see anyone else offering to explain this and it looks like majority memorize "facts" instead of properly understanding.

So my reaction to your "joke" is as frustration to my inability to explain this "simple" (simple to me) problem.

I was quite convinced that the other two examples will be understood and then with that example (a) will also be understood but apparently I was wrong.
There are even people thinking that (c) can work so you can have a different current current at output than input in a floating GND circuit and that is on a electronics hobby forum.
So this every action has an equal and opposite reaction is not understood by majority (it makes it even worse that people that argue with me have an engineering degree).

So yes I understand I'm very bad at explaining / teaching and this is also not fun for me but I can not stop as I do not live in complete isolation.   
I depend on other people same as everybody else and world can be better and safer if more people can understand this important part of physics (the every action has an equal and opposite reaction).

If I were to be able to explain to you what the issue is and assume you understand it. Will you be willing to spend time explaining to others ?
My goal is to find just a few people that can understand until the info becomes widespread and the misinformation is corrected.

Else people will think that a wind only powered vehicle can drive directly downwind faster than wind for unlimited amount of time.
All this based on a series of incomplete experiments that do not show that to be true. What they show is that vehicle can exceed wind speed but is due to energy storage and that means it will be above that speed only for a limited amount of time proportional with the amount of stored energy.
And while I'm bad at explaining I'm not stupid and if I was wrong and everybody else was right then I will have been able to understand.

electrodacus:
Here is another method of explaining using pulling instead of pushing.
In below image you see a typical example of Newton's third law maybe similar to what you will find in a school physics book.
Now imagine replacing that Newton meter indicator will some sort of gearbox so input is connected towards human and output towards wall.
Gearbox is floating in mid air same as that Newton meter so only two points of contact.  Can you imagine human pulling with say 100N and wall experiencing anything other than same 100N in opposite direction ?
If so please explain and if not then how is case (a) any different ?

 

fourfathom:
Please explain how slip-stick hysteresis adds power to a system.

electrodacus:

--- Quote from: fourfathom on February 09, 2023, 03:14:02 am ---Please explain how slip-stick hysteresis adds power to a system.

--- End quote ---

It does not add power. Stick slip hysteresis allows the energy to be charged and discharged.
So in this slow motion video https://odysee.com/@dacustemp:8/wheel-cart-energy-storage-slow:8

You can see the treadmill / moving paper applies a force that makes the input wheel (the one on the right) to rotate as the belt is being stretched.
The force will increase until the point that force is large enough to make the input wheel slip.
There is a difference between the static friction and kinetic friction thus the hysteresis and so as soon as the wheel slips the force drops instantly and thus the stored energy in the rubber belt can power the vehicle so that stored elastic energy is converted into kinetic energy.
But as the energy in the belt is discharged the force drops and so the front wheel sticks again and the process will repeat.

So the stick slip hysteresis is the trigger for charge and discharge of the stored energy. So during discharge is like vehicle is powered from inside instead of outside.
If there was no energy storage or the input wheel could not slip the vehicle could only move in the direction of applied force so to the left as seen in this other video where friction at the output wheels (left wheels) is reduced so to ensure they slip before the input wheels.
https://odysee.com/@dacustemp:8/stick-slip-removed-from-front-wheels:0  first 15 seconds.

fourfathom:

--- Quote ---Stick slip hysteresis allows the energy to be charged and discharged.
--- End quote ---
You do realize that this makes no sense whatsoever, don't you?
If there is energy to be charged and discharged, this same energy can be delivered in a steady continuous manner, with the wheels not slipping or sticking.
But forget energy.  Forget power.  Just consider the geometry.  If the geometry works but your physics doesn't, then your physics is wrong.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod