Photons dont leave except via blackbody radiation. Pointing the magnetron that drives it out into space would be more efficient if it worked the way you suggest.
The arguments against the drive depend on which of the three suggested explanations you like to prefer. Aside of course from the lame dogmatic ones that is.
Even if he sends this to space, the argument that it is leaking evaporated bits from the interior of the cavity will persist.
I expect others to follow.
Until he sends the damned thing on a tour of the solar system with no other forms of propulsion, where any such arguments would require the evaporation of significant portions of the cavity internals, and where both speedup and slowdowns happen, this will never be settled.
Is it some arbitrary dollar amount, or is it the condition of income insufficiency for basic needs, like shelter?
Think about that when you say there is no low income in silly valley.
People can make 300k a year there, and be forced to live under a bridge, due to systemic housing shortages.
When you cannot afford basic needs, you are low income. End of story. Contrary to what your economics teacher said, purpetual growth is not sustainable. You end up with situations like this, because you cannot simply conjure forth new real estate, and ultradense housing will have similar issues. (You can only build the skyscraper class apartment building so high before the steel and glass at the bottom cannot bear any more weight.)
At some point, the rate of growth must slow, due to that dread specter of reality.
That people making so much money that they can afford mansions elsewhere in the country are fighting over 1 room studio apartment flats is a sign. Wake up and smell the bullshit. No, it isn't from the people saying they can't afford rent without rent control. It is from the greed is good idiots driving up demand so high, that you can use it as a space elevator.
What's the difference between a city and an industrial park?
One has residents, and infrastructure for residents. The other does not.
I did not read TFA, (it's traditional), but it sounds like this mayor wants to do the following:
1) light commercial zones must not be exploited for yet more satellite office buildings, and needs to stay as strip malls, gas stations, dollar general stores, et al.
2) satellite office construction projects will have to seek different zoning from light commercial, to avoid having the problems proposal 1) seeks to address.
The headline sounds sensational-- "oh noes! Coders not welcome in Palo alto!"
I read him differently. "People actually live in Palo alto. They need to be able to buy gas and groceries without having to drive all the way to San jose. Light commercial zoning currently covers both the circle k, and pallantir's new office building. There is only so much real estate in Palo alto. Only so much of that can be light commercial. Only so much of the limited light commercial property can be office buildings, if people are going to live in Palo alto, they need light commercial that actually sells products, like a circle k does. We want to make it so new office proposals do not eliminate all other forms of light commercial, no matter how much money they have to wave around."
Cynicism at 11, with the know broken off, has more to do with shameless capitalism and marketing hype, imho.
When you get bombarded with shit like hyperloop, and the media's version of what EMDrive means, (you know, shit like "alpha centaur in a year!!") I think it is very easy to just grow a "no, all that is bullshit." defense.
To me, observable reality is king. It is what theory aims to predict, and that relationship is what makes theory useful.
When observed reality behaves differently from the predictions made by theory, 3 things can be the contributor:
1) the observation is incorrect. (No, the magician did not actually saw the woman in half, timmy.)
2) the theory is incomplete, and an edge case has occured. (The theory is sound, but incorrect or assumed values were used in the prediction)
3) the theory is dead nuts wrong, and this proves it. (No, there really is no luminiferous aether. Really.)
This short list is compiled in order of likelihood. There is a lot that can happen in an experiment that can createll false measurements. Take the "superluminal neutrinos" of a few years back. Experimental error is real, and the bane of this kind of science. It creates illusions that look like magic, just like a stage magician does. People want to believe in magic, which is why con artists (capitalists adhering to PT Barnum's model) and yellow mainstream press (populist rags) love the shit out of saying things are magic.
When something works like magic, the skeptic becomes cynical, because of the actions of those kinds of actors.
So much so, that it detracts from work that would demonstrate outcome #2 being true, and making work that would show #3 true laughably improbable.
People don't believe there is a wolf, when the shepherd boy constantly cries about it for attention when no wolf is there. When he does find a wolf, nobody believes him.
We are now at the point where other villagers are reporting, despite the cynicism, that something wolf like was seen.
When the story breaks in the journal, they will have hair and scat samples showing there is at least an animal that can been describes as a wolf, and that it clearly actually exists.
Only then can we get to outcomes 2 or 3, as is appropriate.
It's just a pipe with a 3d printed abs or nylon diameter reducer with a 45 degree angled inlet the size of the silly string straw. Not complicated at all. The only part you need to print is the venturi inlet diameter adapter. Everything else is off the shelf.
Basically, the parts list looks like this:
(1) air compressor with quick disconnect hose. (1) threaded quick disconnect connector (1) 5in long, 1in Dia threaded pvc pipe (1) 3d printed venturi coupler (1) 36in long, 1/4in dia threaded pvc pipe (1) roll Teflon tape (1) can silly string
Attach 1in dia pipe to the threaded side of the discconnect connector, after wrapping the threads in teflon tape.
Attach the the venturi adapter to the other side of the 1in dia pipe using teflon tape.
Attach the 1/4 dia pipe to the small end of the adapter using teflon tape.
Insert silly string straw into inlet hole.
Insert other side of silly string straw into the sprayer head of the can of silly string.
Attach the assembled venturi pipe to the air compressor hose.
Turn on the air compressor and fill the tank.
Open the valve on the hose to let air through.
Point the narrow end in the direction you want to spray silly string.
Depress the sprayer head to dispense silly string into the venturi.
To make it automatic, you need a simple 3 axis armature, and a solonoid plunger to push the sprayhead down. Maybe an electrically controlled valve to turn air on and off down the pipe, and of course, the camera to track with. (Machine vision is no picnic, but there are fairly mature foss modules out there for doing this.)
A beaglebone black with the camera shield, a single bit gpio for the solonoid, 6 pwm gpios to drive the armature stepper motors, and a suitable power supply would satisfy nicely.
If you want to get fancy, you could make a multi-barrel version that pulses the pipes and cans to increase string delivery yield.
I have all the stuff needed to make the simple venturi pipe already, including the 3d printer. This is a holiday weekend, i think i will build it.
it does not matter the kind of data being sent, only that data was sent. That is fine.
Violations if NN happen when instead of a negotiated agreement, like peering, (or worse, in addition to), the carrier decides that a streaming video packet costs more than an http get request packet, then inspecting those packets, and issuing a bill for the difference.
If it costs more to send a packet of a certain type (because god forbid the isp not be allowed to bufferbloat the shit out you!) then charge the person requesting that kind of packet appropriately. Don't double deal, then cut your own media service slack on the added costs.
But of course, you already knew the difference, now didn't you?
Deal with it. Maybe tell Samsung to stop trying to make me sound like a qr year old girl. I AM NOT going to use the tracked corporate workstation to post on Slashdot during business hours, no matter how much it makes your eyes bleed, or how much you complain about it.
The text mangling is not my fault, so just get over it. Not everything is going to go the way you want. This is one of them. (I would rather my messages not get mangled either, but I prefer not being brought into an office to explain misuse of company resources more.)
1) apple may be headquartered in Cupertino CA, but not all of its sales are in the United states.
2) because of this, and the way international taxation works, there are "apple UK", "Apple china", "Apple Korea", etc. These are wholly owned subsidiaries of Apple USA, but the product produced and sold, is sold exclusively in the subsidiary's local market. This allows the local branch to be taxed by the locall tax authority, on the profits made by that local branch. In theory at least.
3) what really happens is that Apple Ireland, which pays essentially zero taxes, claims sales volumes for markets outside of ireland, knowing that regulators cannot easily disprove that Apple Ireland is not just selling absurd numbers of apple products, and making all that profit legitimately. This is especially true, when Apple USA tells Apple EU to buy exclusively from Apple Ireland, and charge EU customers busing from them essentially a flat shipping cost that is the exact amount they buy fro. Apple Ireland. That artificially moves sales originating in the EU to Ireland's accounting. The actuAL sale occurs inside Ireland, and thus is billable in Ireland, under Irish tax law. (NEVERMIND where the product actually ships to.)
4) Apple says this is perfectly legitimate, Ireland concurs, but EU feels otherwise. EU tells Ireland that sales from EU citizens are originating in the EU, and need to be billed and taxed accordingly.
5)Apple USA, and Apple Ireland don't want those sales to be reported as originating in the EU, because then they have to pay taxes on those sales. Stamp little feet and threaten to take their ball and go home, or to go complain to their mommies.
It isn't that I want to bing watch netflix, it is that netflix should not be billed to deliver content that I requested. I should be billed for having the data that I requested delivered to me.
ISPS want to charge me for having the data I requested delivered to me, and to charge the people providing the data I want for having it cross their network as it is delivered. Moreover, they want to use this double dipping fee as a means to unfairly market their own, competing sources of data.
The person who should be laughed at is you, for being an idiot. Not some strawman perched on a couch watching netflix.
Shotgun places a human operator inot an exposed line of fire against the drone. If the drone is weaponized, there is an imbalance of risk; the drone operator is unharmed if the drone is destroyed. The shotgunner is harmed or killed should the drone be able to react first. If the drone misfires, it won't harm it's operator, and ideally, the drone is deployed instead of exposing ground troops as a first assault device. That means it can spray bullets, and not strike friendly forces (just noncombattants.) The same cannot be said for discharging a shotgun.
The idea is to remove the advantage of using a drone. A shotgun does lots of damage and requires little aiming, yes. It also still requires a human operator, and is likely to hit friendlies nearby. The silly string can hit you at point blank, and not hurt you, making it safe to use near friendlies.
As for portability: see above. Not the intended type of installation. This is an automated point defense system, or a remote operated fixed point defense. The same platform could easily dispense other products, like aluminum dust (and an incindiary flame), or flechette darts, or even Geneva banned chemical substances.
It's not some fear of guns I have, I assure you. It is more being analytical of why drones are attractive to military leaders. If you make them into costly ordinance with a low return on investment, you make them less desirable to deploy. THAT is the point here.
The Inet on, or just after the constriction will literally suck the dispensed silly string down the pipe. The narrower diameter of the shooting end of the pipe increases air velocity. The string will be pushed out of the apart us with much more force, and be carried along with the escaping jet of air, reducing its drag in the air between source and target. This lets the string fly further, and faster than it ever could with just the aerosol can.
Ideally, you would want it to shoot over the top of the drone, and be impelled into the rotors from the top as the string falls. You would want good coverage, so wagging the sprayer should result in a wavy motion of the string, making ai.ING easier, and increasing chances of getting pulled into the rotors.
The speed is less important than energy delivered at site of impact. If the energy delivered is sufficient that the mechanical strain on the string snaps it on contact, rather than tangling on it, then there is a problem with using silly string on the faster moving but less massive drone rotor blades.
Fan rotors move slower, but are more massive, and have more total energy behind them.
You dont need something to be sharp or fast moving to cut you in half; it just needs to exert enough energy over a small area to cause mechanical shear of your body. Getting a loop of wire from a wench wrapped around a leg and slowly slooped up will chop it off just as surely as if the wire was moving fast but at less torque.
The same is true of the silly string vs the fan. If the blade impact is of appropriate energy/volume, regardless of the speed, it will sever the silly string. The fan blade actually has more energy than the rotor prop does. People have had their hands mangled by metal fan blades since at least the 30s, because metal blades are heavy, and when spun up, deliver a lot of kinetic energy on a small area if they encounter living flesh. Thas why the housings on metal bladed fans have suchanged tight wire mesh on them. It's to keep kids from putting fingers in and losing them.
To be a proper experiment, it needs to be a high speed metal bladed fan, with big heavy blades. I can probably find one if I look hard enough.
A thought occurs to me. Functionally, a desk fan with metal blades is an appropriate analog for a drone rotor if the housing is removed.
I may buy the appropriate testin supplies tonight. If silly string can work on something with way more torque force than a drone rotor, like a desk fan, it would be viable softkill material for most drones on the market.
The fact that the silly string is light and airy, and somewhat sticky shortly after spraying, means it will cling to rotors, and thus get wrapped up around them, reducing thier lifting power. Get enough wrapped around the rotor, and it will lose all lifiting capacity. Drone falls with engines on full.
I agree that it needs testing. I might try it some time to see how much is needed to clog and down a drone.
Get enough of that stuff falling on you, and I doubt you would be all that effective in your dreamy, flagrantly wish-fulfillment fantasy of being an urban assault storm trooper.
There's a reason that drones are scary in urban settings, they can indeed be flying guns, and make it impossible to have valid collateral losses, meaning they are highly desirable to deploy. Making them into ineffectual weapons while posing no collateral risk to your own forces is the appropriate response. Be it just an annoying neighbor hoping for some boobie cam footage, or a weapon iced strike craft, nonlethal neutralizaton from a remote operated position is the way to go. Sillystring is reasonably safe, cheap, and in large quantities, effective even against high powered rotors. (When it gums up the rotor shaft, it causes it to be off balance, which throws off navigation and targetting, even if it does not completely down the craft. Keep spraying, anx it will eventually down the rotors, if they are even just a little exposed. I can think of more exotic, but still easily dispersed countermeasures for fairing protected rotors. )
"There's and exception to what we can get away with concerning our BS marketing since we are a common carrier!"
(Except we don't like that classification, and want to be a digital media service instead, like AOL/TimeWarner, so we can get a slice of other lucrative markets through flagrant disregard of those nasty net neutrality rules.)
Now that they have made and been granted a defence based on their being a CC, it should be used to beat them every time time they try to pretend they are a media distribution service instead, like when they want to throttle packets originating outside their network to favor local traffic delivery for the same kind of service, in contravention of NN.)
But this is fascist 'merica, where corporations are always truthful, and their legal arguments are always right, even they are contradictory.;)
Slashdot Mirror
Photons dont leave except via blackbody radiation. Pointing the magnetron that drives it out into space would be more efficient if it worked the way you suggest.
I think it sounds a little cheesy myself.
Then they will question the methodology and accuracy of the static mass testing before and after.
Forcing the demonstration device on a nice little cruise removes that. Doing both nails the lid on.
Eagleworks is in the usa.
It was also given limited testing in Europe.
The arguments against the drive depend on which of the three suggested explanations you like to prefer. Aside of course from the lame dogmatic ones that is.
Even if he sends this to space, the argument that it is leaking evaporated bits from the interior of the cavity will persist.
I expect others to follow.
Until he sends the damned thing on a tour of the solar system with no other forms of propulsion, where any such arguments would require the evaporation of significant portions of the cavity internals, and where both speedup and slowdowns happen, this will never be settled.
What exactly *is* "low income?"
Is it some arbitrary dollar amount, or is it the condition of income insufficiency for basic needs, like shelter?
Think about that when you say there is no low income in silly valley.
People can make 300k a year there, and be forced to live under a bridge, due to systemic housing shortages.
When you cannot afford basic needs, you are low income. End of story. Contrary to what your economics teacher said, purpetual growth is not sustainable. You end up with situations like this, because you cannot simply conjure forth new real estate, and ultradense housing will have similar issues. (You can only build the skyscraper class apartment building so high before the steel and glass at the bottom cannot bear any more weight.)
At some point, the rate of growth must slow, due to that dread specter of reality.
That people making so much money that they can afford mansions elsewhere in the country are fighting over 1 room studio apartment flats is a sign. Wake up and smell the bullshit. No, it isn't from the people saying they can't afford rent without rent control. It is from the greed is good idiots driving up demand so high, that you can use it as a space elevator.
What's the difference between a city and an industrial park?
One has residents, and infrastructure for residents. The other does not.
I did not read TFA, (it's traditional), but it sounds like this mayor wants to do the following:
1) light commercial zones must not be exploited for yet more satellite office buildings, and needs to stay as strip malls, gas stations, dollar general stores, et al.
2) satellite office construction projects will have to seek different zoning from light commercial, to avoid having the problems proposal 1) seeks to address.
The headline sounds sensational-- "oh noes! Coders not welcome in Palo alto!"
I read him differently. "People actually live in Palo alto. They need to be able to buy gas and groceries without having to drive all the way to San jose. Light commercial zoning currently covers both the circle k, and pallantir's new office building. There is only so much real estate in Palo alto. Only so much of that can be light commercial. Only so much of the limited light commercial property can be office buildings, if people are going to live in Palo alto, they need light commercial that actually sells products, like a circle k does. We want to make it so new office proposals do not eliminate all other forms of light commercial, no matter how much money they have to wave around."
Cynicism at 11, with the know broken off, has more to do with shameless capitalism and marketing hype, imho.
When you get bombarded with shit like hyperloop, and the media's version of what EMDrive means, (you know, shit like "alpha centaur in a year!!") I think it is very easy to just grow a "no, all that is bullshit." defense.
To me, observable reality is king. It is what theory aims to predict, and that relationship is what makes theory useful.
When observed reality behaves differently from the predictions made by theory, 3 things can be the contributor:
1) the observation is incorrect. (No, the magician did not actually saw the woman in half, timmy.)
2) the theory is incomplete, and an edge case has occured. (The theory is sound, but incorrect or assumed values were used in the prediction)
3) the theory is dead nuts wrong, and this proves it. (No, there really is no luminiferous aether. Really.)
This short list is compiled in order of likelihood. There is a lot that can happen in an experiment that can createll false measurements. Take the "superluminal neutrinos" of a few years back. Experimental error is real, and the bane of this kind of science. It creates illusions that look like magic, just like a stage magician does. People want to believe in magic, which is why con artists (capitalists adhering to PT Barnum's model) and yellow mainstream press (populist rags) love the shit out of saying things are magic.
When something works like magic, the skeptic becomes cynical, because of the actions of those kinds of actors.
So much so, that it detracts from work that would demonstrate outcome #2 being true, and making work that would show #3 true laughably improbable.
People don't believe there is a wolf, when the shepherd boy constantly cries about it for attention when no wolf is there. When he does find a wolf, nobody believes him.
We are now at the point where other villagers are reporting, despite the cynicism, that something wolf like was seen.
When the story breaks in the journal, they will have hair and scat samples showing there is at least an animal that can been describes as a wolf, and that it clearly actually exists.
Only then can we get to outcomes 2 or 3, as is appropriate.
Newsflash. "Around the world in 80 days" is a science fiction story.
Now we can send somebody around the world in a few hours.
You asked for an example, there one is.
It's just a pipe with a 3d printed abs or nylon diameter reducer with a 45 degree angled inlet the size of the silly string straw. Not complicated at all. The only part you need to print is the venturi inlet diameter adapter. Everything else is off the shelf.
Basically, the parts list looks like this:
(1) air compressor with quick disconnect hose.
(1) threaded quick disconnect connector
(1) 5in long, 1in Dia threaded pvc pipe
(1) 3d printed venturi coupler
(1) 36in long, 1/4in dia threaded pvc pipe
(1) roll Teflon tape
(1) can silly string
Attach 1in dia pipe to the threaded side of the discconnect connector, after wrapping the threads in teflon tape.
Attach the the venturi adapter to the other side of the 1in dia pipe using teflon tape.
Attach the 1/4 dia pipe to the small end of the adapter using teflon tape.
Insert silly string straw into inlet hole.
Insert other side of silly string straw into the sprayer head of the can of silly string.
Attach the assembled venturi pipe to the air compressor hose.
Turn on the air compressor and fill the tank.
Open the valve on the hose to let air through.
Point the narrow end in the direction you want to spray silly string.
Depress the sprayer head to dispense silly string into the venturi.
To make it automatic, you need a simple 3 axis armature, and a solonoid plunger to push the sprayhead down. Maybe an electrically controlled valve to turn air on and off down the pipe, and of course, the camera to track with. (Machine vision is no picnic, but there are fairly mature foss modules out there for doing this.)
A beaglebone black with the camera shield, a single bit gpio for the solonoid, 6 pwm gpios to drive the armature stepper motors, and a suitable power supply would satisfy nicely.
If you want to get fancy, you could make a multi-barrel version that pulses the pipes and cans to increase string delivery yield.
I have all the stuff needed to make the simple venturi pipe already, including the 3d printer. This is a holiday weekend, i think i will build it.
Nope. Not a direct. ;)
Peering is a prenegotiated flat rate cost.
it does not matter the kind of data being sent, only that data was sent. That is fine.
Violations if NN happen when instead of a negotiated agreement, like peering, (or worse, in addition to), the carrier decides that a streaming video packet costs more than an http get request packet, then inspecting those packets, and issuing a bill for the difference.
If it costs more to send a packet of a certain type (because god forbid the isp not be allowed to bufferbloat the shit out you!) then charge the person requesting that kind of packet appropriately. Don't double deal, then cut your own media service slack on the added costs.
But of course, you already knew the difference, now didn't you?
Does apple make more than 100k a year by sheltering in ireland? Yes, yes they do.
Thats only if they are offering to create jobs.
If they are threatening to terminate jobs, that is called extortion.
That latter statement is untrue in the US. You must pay taxes both to the foreign government, and to the US government.
Note the verbiage, and qualifications required to get ANY KIND of exclusion, and the specificity of that exclusion, as defined in US tax code below.
https://www.irs.gov/individual...
Apple's behavior here is very much a double standard compared to the average citizen.
Deal with it. Maybe tell Samsung to stop trying to make me sound like a qr year old girl. I AM NOT going to use the tracked corporate workstation to post on Slashdot during business hours, no matter how much it makes your eyes bleed, or how much you complain about it.
The text mangling is not my fault, so just get over it. Not everything is going to go the way you want. This is one of them. (I would rather my messages not get mangled either, but I prefer not being brought into an office to explain misuse of company resources more.)
You are not understanding the problem.
I will try to explain it to you.
1) apple may be headquartered in Cupertino CA, but not all of its sales are in the United states.
2) because of this, and the way international taxation works, there are "apple UK", "Apple china", "Apple Korea", etc. These are wholly owned subsidiaries of Apple USA, but the product produced and sold, is sold exclusively in the subsidiary's local market. This allows the local branch to be taxed by the locall tax authority, on the profits made by that local branch. In theory at least.
3) what really happens is that Apple Ireland, which pays essentially zero taxes, claims sales volumes for markets outside of ireland, knowing that regulators cannot easily disprove that Apple Ireland is not just selling absurd numbers of apple products, and making all that profit legitimately. This is especially true, when Apple USA tells Apple EU to buy exclusively from Apple Ireland, and charge EU customers busing from them essentially a flat shipping cost that is the exact amount they buy fro. Apple Ireland. That artificially moves sales originating in the EU to Ireland's accounting. The actuAL sale occurs inside Ireland, and thus is billable in Ireland, under Irish tax law. (NEVERMIND where the product actually ships to.)
4) Apple says this is perfectly legitimate, Ireland concurs, but EU feels otherwise. EU tells Ireland that sales from EU citizens are originating in the EU, and need to be billed and taxed accordingly.
5)Apple USA, and Apple Ireland don't want those sales to be reported as originating in the EU, because then they have to pay taxes on those sales. Stamp little feet and threaten to take their ball and go home, or to go complain to their mommies.
Not even the right argument bro.
It isn't that I want to bing watch netflix, it is that netflix should not be billed to deliver content that I requested. I should be billed for having the data that I requested delivered to me.
ISPS want to charge me for having the data I requested delivered to me, and to charge the people providing the data I want for having it cross their network as it is delivered. Moreover, they want to use this double dipping fee as a means to unfairly market their own, competing sources of data.
The person who should be laughed at is you, for being an idiot. Not some strawman perched on a couch watching netflix.
Thanks for playing.
Shotgun places a human operator inot an exposed line of fire against the drone. If the drone is weaponized, there is an imbalance of risk; the drone operator is unharmed if the drone is destroyed. The shotgunner is harmed or killed should the drone be able to react first. If the drone misfires, it won't harm it's operator, and ideally, the drone is deployed instead of exposing ground troops as a first assault device. That means it can spray bullets, and not strike friendly forces (just noncombattants.) The same cannot be said for discharging a shotgun.
The idea is to remove the advantage of using a drone. A shotgun does lots of damage and requires little aiming, yes. It also still requires a human operator, and is likely to hit friendlies nearby. The silly string can hit you at point blank, and not hurt you, making it safe to use near friendlies.
As for portability: see above. Not the intended type of installation. This is an automated point defense system, or a remote operated fixed point defense. The same platform could easily dispense other products, like aluminum dust (and an incindiary flame), or flechette darts, or even Geneva banned chemical substances.
It's not some fear of guns I have, I assure you. It is more being analytical of why drones are attractive to military leaders. If you make them into costly ordinance with a low return on investment, you make them less desirable to deploy. THAT is the point here.
That's what the venturi pipe is for.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The Inet on, or just after the constriction will literally suck the dispensed silly string down the pipe. The narrower diameter of the shooting end of the pipe increases air velocity. The string will be pushed out of the apart us with much more force, and be carried along with the escaping jet of air, reducing its drag in the air between source and target. This lets the string fly further, and faster than it ever could with just the aerosol can.
Ideally, you would want it to shoot over the top of the drone, and be impelled into the rotors from the top as the string falls. You would want good coverage, so wagging the sprayer should result in a wavy motion of the string, making ai.ING easier, and increasing chances of getting pulled into the rotors.
The speed is less important than energy delivered at site of impact. If the energy delivered is sufficient that the mechanical strain on the string snaps it on contact, rather than tangling on it, then there is a problem with using silly string on the faster moving but less massive drone rotor blades.
Fan rotors move slower, but are more massive, and have more total energy behind them.
You dont need something to be sharp or fast moving to cut you in half; it just needs to exert enough energy over a small area to cause mechanical shear of your body. Getting a loop of wire from a wench wrapped around a leg and slowly slooped up will chop it off just as surely as if the wire was moving fast but at less torque.
The same is true of the silly string vs the fan. If the blade impact is of appropriate energy/volume, regardless of the speed, it will sever the silly string. The fan blade actually has more energy than the rotor prop does. People have had their hands mangled by metal fan blades since at least the 30s, because metal blades are heavy, and when spun up, deliver a lot of kinetic energy on a small area if they encounter living flesh. Thas why the housings on metal bladed fans have suchanged tight wire mesh on them. It's to keep kids from putting fingers in and losing them.
To be a proper experiment, it needs to be a high speed metal bladed fan, with big heavy blades. I can probably find one if I look hard enough.
A thought occurs to me. Functionally, a desk fan with metal blades is an appropriate analog for a drone rotor if the housing is removed.
I may buy the appropriate testin supplies tonight. If silly string can work on something with way more torque force than a drone rotor, like a desk fan, it would be viable softkill material for most drones on the market.
The fact that the silly string is light and airy, and somewhat sticky shortly after spraying, means it will cling to rotors, and thus get wrapped up around them, reducing thier lifting power. Get enough wrapped around the rotor, and it will lose all lifiting capacity. Drone falls with engines on full.
I agree that it needs testing. I might try it some time to see how much is needed to clog and down a drone.
Get enough of that stuff falling on you, and I doubt you would be all that effective in your dreamy, flagrantly wish-fulfillment fantasy of being an urban assault storm trooper.
There's a reason that drones are scary in urban settings, they can indeed be flying guns, and make it impossible to have valid collateral losses, meaning they are highly desirable to deploy. Making them into ineffectual weapons while posing no collateral risk to your own forces is the appropriate response. Be it just an annoying neighbor hoping for some boobie cam footage, or a weapon iced strike craft, nonlethal neutralizaton from a remote operated position is the way to go. Sillystring is reasonably safe, cheap, and in large quantities, effective even against high powered rotors. (When it gums up the rotor shaft, it causes it to be off balance, which throws off navigation and targetting, even if it does not completely down the craft. Keep spraying, anx it will eventually down the rotors, if they are even just a little exposed. I can think of more exotic, but still easily dispersed countermeasures for fairing protected rotors. )
"There's and exception to what we can get away with concerning our BS marketing since we are a common carrier!"
(Except we don't like that classification, and want to be a digital media service instead, like AOL/TimeWarner, so we can get a slice of other lucrative markets through flagrant disregard of those nasty net neutrality rules.)
Now that they have made and been granted a defence based on their being a CC, it should be used to beat them every time time they try to pretend they are a media distribution service instead, like when they want to throttle packets originating outside their network to favor local traffic delivery for the same kind of service, in contravention of NN.)
But this is fascist 'merica, where corporations are always truthful, and their legal arguments are always right, even they are contradictory. ;)