Skill's weekend teaser

[TheBramble]

If you think this is pertinant to our discussion, I really have given you far too much credit.

I sincerely doubt that.

If you're going for relevance and pertinence (note spelling), I’d suggest you check your own posts first.

And once you get over the urge to post before reading, and certainly before digesting, you'll find my post you quote is so terribly relevent you'll feel even sillier.

Now be a good Gecko or I'll turn the light off in your tank....

 

[new_trader]

Thanks to you Skill Leverage every time the ES trades @747.00 I think of conveyor belts!

 

[Mr. Charts]

I'll tell you what, gentlemen (and others), instead of discussing a hypothetical discussion with as much likelihood of turning into reality as I have of successfully impersonating Angelina Jolie with her knickers in a twist, why don't you go and help someone who actually has a real world problem, to wit:

http://www.trade2win.com/boards/fix...ow-do-i-add-substract-pips-current-price.html

I had thought of helping that person, but having seen the almost fatal effects of prolonged knocking of heads against unforgiving brick walls, I decided to desist in the interests of self-preservation.

 

[MrGecko]

This thread has got to the point of being economically irrational to continue contributing to. It just isn't worth it.

It is abundantly clear that, whatever it is that you need in order to understand the solution, you lack. The more you defend your position with irrelevant or unstructured arguments, the more I want to help you see the problem from a different (correct) perspective... The more you resist, and we go on ad infinitum.

(Ironically, this is a similar to the solution; we could go on ad infinitum, but I have no doubt that the last word will be yours. It is the same for the thrust of the jet against the air in the fixed reference frame).

I stand corrected on the pertinants (sic) of your example to the discussion. Unfortunately for you, it has nothing to do with the solution. You would do well to think about some of the earlier examples I mentioned, the paradox of the Arrow et al. While I doubt anyone will be willing to discuss them, you might find they provide you with some interesting thought experiements of your own.

 

[wasp]

try this instead.....

http://www.trade2win.com/boards/general-trading-chat/54330-wot-happened-next.html#post672008

 

[elitejets]

I can't believe I have wasted so many hours today thinking about this and worse still after a long career as an air traffic controller I gave in to my first instinct and I voted wrong

Bramble. A plane taking off is not propelled forward by the wheels (like a car) it is propelled by thrust from jet engines which act on the air and not the ground. It would not matter if the conveyor belt went 10 times as fast as the wheels, the wheels would still spin and the plane would still move down along the conveyor belt and take off because the force of the jet engines on the air would propel it. And ... if the conveyor belt was long enough it would take off.
This is why there are no conveyor belts on aircraft carriers and why we have aircraft designed to land and take off short.

Nicola

 

[porph]

All joking aside, it has been fairly obnoxious, massively down to me I'm sure but, there's only so many times you can explain something before you get exasperated. As I said, thread should be locked imo, there's nothing more to say.

Weak.

 

[Skill Leverage]

Back from the gym, all's well I see...

Weak.

Just to clarify porph; are you here to give an opinion on the problem, or just to make pithy remarks?

Hold it... I don't care, sit down.

 

[Skill Leverage]

So Bramble, you want me to imagine I'm running on a treadmill (exerting lateral force through contact WITH THE TREADMILL), and I've got a flag stuck somewhere...

Someone please tell me what relevance this has to the problem?

I repeat, while running on a treadmill I am exerting forward motion through my contact with the ground. A plane does not do this. This is the entire point of this question, posed to show the difference between a Level 1 thinker and those above.

Edit: Mr_Gecko is right, I've been saying it for a while; you just plain will never get it, therefore this argument is redundant. I've been pretty lippy at times during this to my discredit, but you continue to be aggressive and condescending, in the face of everyone else telling you that you're wrong. There is nothing more of value anyone can say on this topic.

 

[Hotch]

Calm down lads. Skill I understand your frustration, but the question isn't as elementary as you are saying and is rather counter intuitive at first glance, you (and others, hopefully me included) have given explanations most of us understand, but obviously they are not so clear to bramble. You might of received some stick but just let it go, it's not worth getting aggravated about.

This question has had many intelligent people on both sides arguing the toss about it, it may have been solved, but there are still many intelligent people with the wrong idea, whether you get the answer right or wrong doesn't really prove anything.

If Bramble or anyone else is genuinely interested in learning more about this, or arguing with people far more intelligent then us I can probably get somebody to explain all as a google search hasn't come up with anything inspirational.

Just relax guys, smiles!

 

[Skill Leverage]

We're not coming to blows or anything Hotch, it's just that Gecko and I have the same crappy disorder where we cannot leave something unfinished or unsolved; we are both so desperate to get Brambles to see the truth, even if it has meant us banging our heads off brick walls for the past 2 days.

But you're right, getting it right or wrong doesn't prove anything, and most people (myself and G included) got it wrong at first, almost everyone does. That's the whole point of education and logical thinking; nobody knows why the Earth orbits the Sun, until you explain it to them, and it's how you react to this information that matters.

So many people on this thread initially thought 'the plane stays still' but, on reviewing the explanation, they come to see the hidden truth. This makes them every bit as intelligent as the person asking the question, if not more so; for all you guys know I could have no idea what I'm talking about, if I was an incredibly good bullsh!tter. I only get exasperated with the people who flat out refuse to accept that their opinion can be wrong, regardless of how compelling the evidence may be.

I didn't start this thread to make myself feel superior; of course it's bloody easy when you know the answer and I perhaps forgot this at times. I'm merely saying that after hours and hours of repeating the same 2 points to someone without it sinking in, even Mother Teresa would probably let out a whisper of an F-word...

SL

 

[Mr. Charts]

THE WHEELS ARE JUST SPINNING ON THEIR AXEL... WHY CAN'T YOU BLOODY UNDERSTAND THIS?!

Seriously, a child could understand this. It is now literally you; you are the last person we have to convince of the truth. Apart from perhaps Mr Charts, although I'm pretty sure you are both the same figment of my worst nightmare.

I thought the plane wouldn't move PURELY on the PRECISE wording of the OP.
I have never said it wouldn't take off in slightly different circumstances so you mustn't think I don't know it would take off in those different circumstances. You have made assumptions about what I KNOW without PRECISELY reading what I've said and come to the wrong conclusions.

If you have nightmares about me are they the ones where you are trying to fly (unaided by a propulsion unit, long piece of string, catapault, tug, elastic band, self adhesive wax wings etc) to escape and barely get airborne before getting dragged down into terrifying oblivion?

Chill, man. If you are convinced you are correct about anything and any proof offered doesn't change that and someone declines to accept your opinion/view/interpretation/facts, then don't take it personally, regard it as being their loss. Otherwise life becomes one long series of frustrations, battles etc.
OK, if someone argues the earth is banana shaped and won't accept otherwise, then relax and say.........whatever.
Why worry about what is going on in someone else's mind.

 

[Skill Leverage]

I know Charts I know... I just can't help myself, much like I can't leave something on a table if its edges aren't aligned to the table's...

I need help, basically.

 

[Mr. Charts]

Don't worry about it.
Buy a circular table.

 

[Skill Leverage]

That's a bloody fantastic idea.

Ha it's not as bad as I make it sound in all fairness, it's only when I put something close to the edge that I have to fix it. You're very right though, I shouldn't be so worried about what other people can or can't understand.

Let's all look at wasp's thread instead, it's far more interesting.

 

[MrGecko]

I am such a dork.

As if it is going to make any bloody difference at all - but I couldn't help myself. This is how I am thinking about this problem; Don;t anybody think this is all for Brambles sake, it is just as much to satisfy my own curiosities.

In diagrams 1+2, the conveyor belt is represented at a frozen point in time, there the wheel can be treated as having another wheel below... the conveyor belt is then made up of an infinite number of "rollers" underneath it, eath with a tiny portion of their circumference exposed to the (aero)plane.

As the the 3rd, it is just to show what I mean by frames of reference; the rollers can quite happily rotate and remain in a fixed position with respect to x' , but they are moving away from the origin with velocity dx / dt.

Lol, anyway, enjoyed thinking about this on paper.

 

[Skill Leverage]

I'm guessing you have issues with tables as well...!

Awesome work Mr_G, v impressive. I stand by what I mentioned to you earlier though; in my experience if they can't understand the English, they aint gonna understand the maths.

You never know though, and truly top work, so good that I am off to spread some around so that I may rep you forthwith.

SL

 

[MrGecko]

Folks, the maths is all bollocks; just equations relating changes in one thing to another, GCSE calculus.

The interesting part, for me at least, is how to present the problem in an accessible way - that is, one I can get my head around.

 

[Skill Leverage]

In that case I think you've failed mate lol. I reckon Brambles will come back and tell you to stick a flag up your ****, ride your bike down a hill and see if you can draw in air to whistle.

 

[MrGecko]

Sh!t, I think I've got it you know.

Anyone watching, get two equally sized coins and place one on top of the other, like in the diagram. then roll the top coin around to the bottom, How many revolutions has the top coin done? 1! not a half!

Moreover, it doesnt matter how fast you roll the queens head around, it will always be one revolution per half turn.

NOW

Imagine that the wheels of the plane are a 5p, and the conveyor belt is a f*cking great big circle - so bit that the surface can be considered flat compared to the fixed reference frame (not that it matters, because planes can take off going downhill). If you can roll the 5p around so that is moves enough distance along the circumference of the massive coin, the relative air speed will be whatever it needs to be and the plane takes off.

It's late, but if what I think is true is true, then


BOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!