> Incidentally a test on a treadmill is not equivalent...
The "ground" moving backward is exactly equivalent to the air moving forward. The treadmill merely puts the experimenter in a reference frame stationary with respect to the air.
> When they put the model on the treadmill and it fights it's way uphill it is > NOT going faster than the wind. There still is a tailwind from the vehicle's > perspective.
> I won't believe these guys until they publish blueprints that someone else > can use to build another craft and replicate what these guys are claiming.
If you actually understood what they are claiming you wouldn't need "bluprints". The basic principles of how to build the device are trivially obvious (why it works, though, is subtle).
> It's a big world out there. Bigger than/. stories would lead you to > believe. This sun is shining. The sky is blue.
Well, actually it's about to rain. But having just run my morning mile, watching people who failed first-year physics make fools of themselves on Slashdot is a good way to relax.
In any case I want no "universal data plan" optimized for people who watch movies on their cellphones, view six hours of tv a day, and download thousands of hours of music forced on me by government. If I want anything it's metered service (that's metered, not tiered).
> Except that according to people like Raymond Chen, the Office folks were > just crappily reverse engineering those private APIs and doing things they > weren't supposed to be doing by having done so.
But once they had done so Microsoft was not going to ship a version of Windows that broke Office.
Slashdot Mirror
> Incidentally a test on a treadmill is not equivalent...
The "ground" moving backward is exactly equivalent to the air moving forward. The treadmill merely puts the experimenter in a reference frame stationary with respect to the air.
> Where does the additional energy come from to increase the speed of the
> vehicle?
The wind. The air behind the vehicle is moving forward more slowly than that ahead of it.
> When they put the model on the treadmill and it fights it's way uphill it is
> NOT going faster than the wind. There still is a tailwind from the vehicle's
> perspective.
Where is this tailwind coming from?
> ...but if it were modified with a vertical turbine it MIGHT see more
> widespread use.
Not a chance.
You confound force and energy.
> The vehicle in the article will never see widespread use...
No shit. Never would have guessed it. Do you really mean that this is not going to be the successor to the hybrid?
> I won't believe these guys until they publish blueprints that someone else
> can use to build another craft and replicate what these guys are claiming.
If you actually understood what they are claiming you wouldn't need "bluprints". The basic principles of how to build the device are trivially obvious (why it works, though, is subtle).
> It's a big world out there. Bigger than /. stories would lead you to
> believe. This sun is shining. The sky is blue.
Well, actually it's about to rain. But having just run my morning mile, watching people who failed first-year physics make fools of themselves on Slashdot is a good way to relax.
> In short, this did not happen. The vehicle did not reach steady state direct
> downwind travel above the ground-relative velocity of the wind.
Let's see the color of your money.
> I know the result and I am offering long odds to all comers!
How much money and what odds?
> So, as the cart accelerates from slower than the wind to faster than the
> wind, why doesn't the propeller change direction?
Because the wheels are driving it.
> The propeller would push against the air with a most the same force as
> supplied by the wheels...
Force!=energy.
> Dead aft does _not_ work.
It does for this device. That's the point.
Those craft were not sailing dead downwind as these ones do. See sailing faster than the wind .
..."the exact same thing"?
In any case I want no "universal data plan" optimized for people who watch movies on their cellphones, view six hours of tv a day, and download thousands of hours of music forced on me by government. If I want anything it's metered service (that's metered, not tiered).
n/t
...there would be at least as much reason to worry. There just wouldn't be any way to stop it.
We can only hope.
> Google is in a better position to analyze patents that haven't been
> granted/published yet? Does Google have spies inside the USPTO?
Patent applications are published 18 months after filing. There are no more submarine patents.
They may be trying, but I suspect that volcanic ash is not a real good medium for the propagation of sound.
Got some 20' golf balls and 200' tires handy?
The amount of water from rain falling in the hole will be negligible compared to the flow in the underground "pipe" that caused it.
> In all the photos, probably taken at least 12 hours later, if not days, not
> even an orange cone.
Look at the first picture. The street is barricaded a block away.
Unfortunately, it's volcanic ash. . Not sturdy stuff.
> Except that according to people like Raymond Chen, the Office folks were
> just crappily reverse engineering those private APIs and doing things they
> weren't supposed to be doing by having done so.
But once they had done so Microsoft was not going to ship a version of Windows that broke Office.