Can a machine move down wind under the power of the wind and go FASTER than the wind?
When the question was posed a few answered in the affirmative, supplying physics equations and theory to prove it possible . They were immediately attacked, most times using ad hominem, the standard response being "you're an idiot!", or "you've never studied Physics", etc... Amazingly, Physics teachers & professors, dept heads, even those trained in aerodynamics, were among the most vociferous protestors.
Models were built which proved the concept but the builders were accused of hiding propulsive devices, or of towing, or running the device on a hill but filming with a slanted camera and editing the file so to top and bottom of the film frames were parallel to the road. A model was built out of one small pipe, two rods, to gears, two wheels and a propeller and mailed to dissenters. The model was dismissed. In other words, the only way those in the affirmative could "prove" what is to the dissenters "obviously wrong" is if they were immoral, corrupt, or outright evil and falsified the proof.
Google funded the two engineers who had advocated the possibility of such a device so that they could build one. They did. Sailing and Aerodynamics Regulatory bodies responsible for approving speed records, certifying equipment, etc..., attended the first demonstration of the device, which is called the "Blackbird". It achieved a down wind speed of 2.8 times the speed of the wind. They certified the records and the device. Then dissenters started claiming that "sure, you can build one in practice, but can you prove it in theory", as if the first explanations were never offered.
It's all documented here:
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/08/ddwfttw/all/1
That article also showed that the topic was visited in the 1940 by a Physics student, who wrote a paper describing the theory and math behind it. A link is in the article.
I was most taken back by the lack of civility displayed in the discussion, most of it replaced with arrogance and hubris. Discussions of current events at most news sites rapidly devolve into such displays of intolerance, with both sides striving, because they disagree, to be as disagreeable as they can be. It's getting to the point that the only communication some people seem to think is left is that coming out of the barrel of a gun.
When the question was posed a few answered in the affirmative, supplying physics equations and theory to prove it possible . They were immediately attacked, most times using ad hominem, the standard response being "you're an idiot!", or "you've never studied Physics", etc... Amazingly, Physics teachers & professors, dept heads, even those trained in aerodynamics, were among the most vociferous protestors.
Models were built which proved the concept but the builders were accused of hiding propulsive devices, or of towing, or running the device on a hill but filming with a slanted camera and editing the file so to top and bottom of the film frames were parallel to the road. A model was built out of one small pipe, two rods, to gears, two wheels and a propeller and mailed to dissenters. The model was dismissed. In other words, the only way those in the affirmative could "prove" what is to the dissenters "obviously wrong" is if they were immoral, corrupt, or outright evil and falsified the proof.
Google funded the two engineers who had advocated the possibility of such a device so that they could build one. They did. Sailing and Aerodynamics Regulatory bodies responsible for approving speed records, certifying equipment, etc..., attended the first demonstration of the device, which is called the "Blackbird". It achieved a down wind speed of 2.8 times the speed of the wind. They certified the records and the device. Then dissenters started claiming that "sure, you can build one in practice, but can you prove it in theory", as if the first explanations were never offered.
It's all documented here:
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/08/ddwfttw/all/1
That article also showed that the topic was visited in the 1940 by a Physics student, who wrote a paper describing the theory and math behind it. A link is in the article.
I was most taken back by the lack of civility displayed in the discussion, most of it replaced with arrogance and hubris. Discussions of current events at most news sites rapidly devolve into such displays of intolerance, with both sides striving, because they disagree, to be as disagreeable as they can be. It's getting to the point that the only communication some people seem to think is left is that coming out of the barrel of a gun.
Comment