"Oh, it's a big pretty white plane with red stripes, curtains in the windows and wheels and it just looks like a big Tylenol."
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/MuXK1nr9_jg"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MuXK1nr9_jg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/U9STo3fjfGg"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/U9STo3fjfGg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
You're as dumb as the rest of the people who believe in the experiment. That experiment can be done a few different ways. They did it the way it would obviously take off. In a perfect experiment, done the way the original experiment I believe was intended to do, it wouldn't move. If you could in fact build a treadmill big and strong enough to where it could match the speed of the plane, there is no way it takes off. A plane with no ground speed doesn't move.
Do you still not comprehend the fact that the wheels on a plane have jack **** to do with how it moves forward? There is absolutely no way to do what the original experiment says because a treadmill can NEVER negate the forward motion of the plane. It doesn't matter how fast it goes or if it can match the speed of the plane exactly. It can NEVER keep the plane stationary. The treadmill could move at 9,999,999,999,999 MPH and the plane would still move forward because the wheels don't do ****. The experiment was never really about if a stationary plane can take off because it's IMPOSSIBLE to keep a plane stationary on a treadmill.
Wow.... well I think the original myth was whether or not a plane could take off a conveyor belt moving in the opposite direction..it did...so deal with it. I'd say the closest any plane will come to instantly flying from a stationary position is if you either are using a Harrier or you're using the catapult system aircraft carriers use...otherwise, just use a freakin helicopter so we can end this debate, which should have been closed after that episode aired.
I see where you're coming from. I have debate this for over two years here and on another forum. It's impossible and dumb. End of thread.
I'll agree with you on one thing. If the plane plane could be made to stay stationary relative to the ground, it would not take off. The flaw of the experiment as initially described is the methodology used to try to achieve that.
Normally I would not be so rude as to say you must be the stupidst person on the BBS but you've been nothing but a jackass for the whole thread and seem to be COMPLETELY ignoring the close to 50+ posts explaining why the example even as you describe it now will lead to a takeoff.
they way they set the test up is stupid. in their test, the conveyor belt was pointless because it didnt go fast enough to counteract the forward movement of the plane. isnt that the whole point of the conveyor belt anyway so that the plane will not move forward? if there was a conveyor belt that moved fast enough to negate the forward movement of the plane, and the plane stood still, then the plane would not take off... its very simple.. i think that the plane tied to the wall question that others have suggested in this thread is the easiest way to think about it.
Watch the last few minutes of the first vid I posted. They explain it pretty clearly why the treadmill has no effect regardless of its speed. If you can't follow that then I don't know what else to say.
Ok, I get it now...no matter what speed the conveyer belt is moving, the plane will still move forward and create lift thus taking off. So if the plane is traveling 25mph and the conveyer belt is going in the opposite direction also at 25mph, the plane will move forward and the wheels will actually be spinning at 50mph.... DD
PLEASE READ THE THREAD BEFORE YOU POST. The conveyor could have been moving double the speed of the plane and the plane would still move. Imagine you got on a treadmill with roller blades. would it send you shooting backwards? If you were holding on to the rails wouldn't you move forward if you pulled your self forward. the force you are creating by grabing the bars mirror the force a planes engines provide the plane. They are both independent on their attached wheels. Have you ever taken a physics class? if not, maybe you sould refrain for such bold statements as "it's very simple"
so whats the initial question? is it 1) would a conveyor belt be able to negate the plane's forward momentum? or 2) if a plane's forward momentum were able to be negated by a conveyor belt, would it be able to take off? what is the point of the conveyor belt if it doesn't negate the forward momentum? if there is no forward movement then the plane does not take off, i did read the thread, brando, and still "it's very simple"
This is the initial problem "A plane is standing on a movable runway(something like a conveyor) As the plane moves, the conveyor moves but in the opposite direction. The conveyor has a system that tracks the speed of the plane and matches it exactly in the opposite direction." IT was on the very first post in the thread. You're right. There is no point to discussing it because the place will obviously move. That is why the thread has been so frustrating. People don't understand it. You don't seem to either. In your last post you said the problem was that the conveyor was not moving fast enough. You are incorrect here and are supporting the notion that the speed of the belt has anything to do with the speed of the plane.
there is no one way of understanding this question, as many others have said in this thread. i was viewing it as a hypothetical question. i thought the main issue of the question was whether the plane could take off with no forward momentum, not whether or not some conveyor belt could actually achieve this feat of negating the plane's forward movement.
The use of a conveyor belt is POINTLESS! That's what we're arguing. The conveyor belt neither hinders nor helps the plane take off. It's pointless. It's there to fool people into thinking it actually has an effect on the experiment when in reality it doesn't. It's what makes the riddle (if you want to call it that) a riddle.
