Can the airplane take off?

[sao123]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Smilin
Does the spinning wheel then impart any force on me? A tiny bit, yes. Enough to yank me backwards at the speed of the moving conveyor (like is magically happening with your plane). Of course not. That's retarded.

Of courses your retard. No one is saying you would go backwards at the speed of the treadmill and no one is say you can't move faster then a treadmill.

I'm saying that if you read the question such that the treadmill tracks the speed of the plane relitive to the treadmill surface the plane will not move that is all.

you write like a 4rth grader and calculate physics questions like one too.

I have highlighted a word you have misspelled in nearly every post you have made.
It is relative.

Secondly -
Track - Verb
1 a : to follow the tracks or traces of or to search for by following evidence until found
2 a : to observe or plot the moving path of
3 : to keep track of (as a trend), to follow

if the treadmill tracks the plane relative to itself, that infers nothing about applying any force, or changing/interfere/interacting with the plane in any manner. A tracking treadmill does nothing.


Thirdy, Einstein discovered that time passes at different rates for objects moving at different velocities. Every velocity is measured against spacetime itself, and has a definate value. If you had any knowledge of the theory of spacial relativity, you'd understand that everything you say is WRONG!

 

[BrownTown]

omfg, don't even start trying to get Einstein involved here, that has absolutely no bearing on this discussion. You stick with the part where you call smack Troll an idiot, that actually makes sense.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Smilin
Does the spinning wheel then impart any force on me? A tiny bit, yes. Enough to yank me backwards at the speed of the moving conveyor (like is magically happening with your plane). Of course not. That's retarded.

Of courses your retard. No one is saying you would go backwards at the speed of the treadmill and no one is say you can't move faster then a treadmill.

I'm saying that if you read the question such that the treadmill tracks the speed of the plane relitive to the treadmill surface the plane will not move that is all.

Alright looky we need wrap up here before the weekend because I'm just not interested enough in this boring ******. I'm going to number my lines here even so you can tell me exactly where you dispute me. Things you said are not numbered. You are not allowed to dispute yourself.

Ok, first I'm going to restate the question from the OP and list one further assumption
"You have an airplane on a conveyor belt - when the airplane moves forward, the conveyor matches its speed in reverse."
My assumption: The air, the plane and the treadmill are all perfectly still relative to each other at the beginning. (no line number on this...state so directly if you disagree)

1. Note one very important point: "when the airplane moves". It happens to also say "forward" but that is not important. What is important is the "moves" part.
2. That by definition means the airplane cannot have a speed of zero at some point in time.
3. It may start with a speed of zero. It must, at some point, NOT have a speed of zero because it "moves".
4. speed is the change in distance between two points over time.
5. We now gotta pause here and pick our two points to determine what speed we are talking about. I personally think this is where you spin off into a paradox..we'll see...
5A - Airspeed... point 1 is the air. Point 2 is the plane.
5B - Groundspeed... point 1 is on the treadmill surface. Point 2 is the plane.
6. Per your quote above, "the treadmill tracks the speed of the plane relitive to the treadmill surface" I believe you mean 5B, groundspeed...we'll proceed with that....so here we go?

"the plane will not move" (your statement. no line number. you cannot dispute)

7. You have now created a paradox. The question states "when the airplane moves" and you state, "the plane whill not move".

The end.

 

[Ruptga]

As hilarious as it is to read all your inventive ways of telling Smack Down that he's a moron (and he definately is if he believes what he's typing), I think he's actually winning. Not because he's winning the "argument", but I think he's just carrying on to get his post count up. But, if y'all do want to humor him and continue, that's fine with me because I find it pretty funny.

 

[BrownTown]

yeah, people need to just stop posting here, but then smack Troll will just go on arguing with himself and continuing to bump this thread.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Smilin
Does the spinning wheel then impart any force on me? A tiny bit, yes. Enough to yank me backwards at the speed of the moving conveyor (like is magically happening with your plane). Of course not. That's retarded.

Of courses your retard. No one is saying you would go backwards at the speed of the treadmill and no one is say you can't move faster then a treadmill.

I'm saying that if you read the question such that the treadmill tracks the speed of the plane relitive to the treadmill surface the plane will not move that is all.

Alright looky we need wrap up here before the weekend because I'm just not interested enough in this boring ******. I'm going to number my lines here even so you can tell me exactly where you dispute me. Things you said are not numbered. You are not allowed to dispute yourself.

Ok, first I'm going to restate the question from the OP and list one further assumption
"You have an airplane on a conveyor belt - when the airplane moves forward, the conveyor matches its speed in reverse."
My assumption: The air, the plane and the treadmill are all perfectly still relative to each other at the beginning. (no line number on this...state so directly if you disagree)

1. Note one very important point: "when the airplane moves". It happens to also say "forward" but that is not important. What is important is the "moves" part.
2. That by definition means the airplane cannot have a speed of zero at some point in time.
3. It may start with a speed of zero. It must, at some point, NOT have a speed of zero because it "moves".
4. speed is the change in distance between two points over time.
5. We now gotta pause here and pick our two points to determine what speed we are talking about. I personally think this is where you spin off into a paradox..we'll see...
5A - Airspeed... point 1 is the air. Point 2 is the plane.
5B - Groundspeed... point 1 is on the treadmill surface. Point 2 is the plane.
6. Per your quote above, "the treadmill tracks the speed of the plane relitive to the treadmill surface" I believe you mean 5B, groundspeed...we'll proceed with that....so here we go?

"the plane will not move" (your statement. no line number. you cannot dispute)

7. You have now created a paradox. The question states "when the airplane moves" and you state, "the plane whill not move".

The end.

The plane moves on the treadmill. It doesn't move relitive to ground. There goes your paradox.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Smilin
Does the spinning wheel then impart any force on me? A tiny bit, yes. Enough to yank me backwards at the speed of the moving conveyor (like is magically happening with your plane). Of course not. That's retarded.

Of courses your retard. No one is saying you would go backwards at the speed of the treadmill and no one is say you can't move faster then a treadmill.

I'm saying that if you read the question such that the treadmill tracks the speed of the plane relitive to the treadmill surface the plane will not move that is all.

Alright looky we need wrap up here before the weekend because I'm just not interested enough in this boring ******. I'm going to number my lines here even so you can tell me exactly where you dispute me. Things you said are not numbered. You are not allowed to dispute yourself.

Ok, first I'm going to restate the question from the OP and list one further assumption
"You have an airplane on a conveyor belt - when the airplane moves forward, the conveyor matches its speed in reverse."
My assumption: The air, the plane and the treadmill are all perfectly still relative to each other at the beginning. (no line number on this...state so directly if you disagree)

1. Note one very important point: "when the airplane moves". It happens to also say "forward" but that is not important. What is important is the "moves" part.
2. That by definition means the airplane cannot have a speed of zero at some point in time.
3. It may start with a speed of zero. It must, at some point, NOT have a speed of zero because it "moves".
4. speed is the change in distance between two points over time.
5. We now gotta pause here and pick our two points to determine what speed we are talking about. I personally think this is where you spin off into a paradox..we'll see...
5A - Airspeed... point 1 is the air. Point 2 is the plane.
5B - Groundspeed... point 1 is on the treadmill surface. Point 2 is the plane.
6. Per your quote above, "the treadmill tracks the speed of the plane relitive to the treadmill surface" I believe you mean 5B, groundspeed...we'll proceed with that....so here we go?

"the plane will not move" (your statement. no line number. you cannot dispute)

7. You have now created a paradox. The question states "when the airplane moves" and you state, "the plane whill not move".

The end.

The plane moves on the treadmill. It doesn't move relitive to ground. There goes your paradox.

Ah, I see. That means we have now transitioned from a logical paradox to violating newtons third law:

"For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction"

Let's pause here and again restate the question plus my assumption:
"You have an airplane on a conveyor belt - when the airplane moves forward, the conveyor matches its speed in reverse."
My assumption: The air, the plane and the treadmill are all perfectly still relative to each other at the beginning.

So when the propeller/turbine turns on and applies force to the air the air is rapidly propelled backwards at high velocity. Where does the equal and opposite force come from to hold the plane perfectly still?

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Smilin
Does the spinning wheel then impart any force on me? A tiny bit, yes. Enough to yank me backwards at the speed of the moving conveyor (like is magically happening with your plane). Of course not. That's retarded.

Of courses your retard. No one is saying you would go backwards at the speed of the treadmill and no one is say you can't move faster then a treadmill.

I'm saying that if you read the question such that the treadmill tracks the speed of the plane relitive to the treadmill surface the plane will not move that is all.

Alright looky we need wrap up here before the weekend because I'm just not interested enough in this boring ******. I'm going to number my lines here even so you can tell me exactly where you dispute me. Things you said are not numbered. You are not allowed to dispute yourself.

Ok, first I'm going to restate the question from the OP and list one further assumption
"You have an airplane on a conveyor belt - when the airplane moves forward, the conveyor matches its speed in reverse."
My assumption: The air, the plane and the treadmill are all perfectly still relative to each other at the beginning. (no line number on this...state so directly if you disagree)

1. Note one very important point: "when the airplane moves". It happens to also say "forward" but that is not important. What is important is the "moves" part.
2. That by definition means the airplane cannot have a speed of zero at some point in time.
3. It may start with a speed of zero. It must, at some point, NOT have a speed of zero because it "moves".
4. speed is the change in distance between two points over time.
5. We now gotta pause here and pick our two points to determine what speed we are talking about. I personally think this is where you spin off into a paradox..we'll see...
5A - Airspeed... point 1 is the air. Point 2 is the plane.
5B - Groundspeed... point 1 is on the treadmill surface. Point 2 is the plane.
6. Per your quote above, "the treadmill tracks the speed of the plane relitive to the treadmill surface" I believe you mean 5B, groundspeed...we'll proceed with that....so here we go?

"the plane will not move" (your statement. no line number. you cannot dispute)

7. You have now created a paradox. The question states "when the airplane moves" and you state, "the plane whill not move".

The end.

The plane moves on the treadmill. It doesn't move relitive to ground. There goes your paradox.

Ah, I see. That means we have now transitioned from a logical paradox to violating newtons third law:

"For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction"

Let's pause here and again restate the question plus my assumption:
"You have an airplane on a conveyor belt - when the airplane moves forward, the conveyor matches its speed in reverse."
My assumption: The air, the plane and the treadmill are all perfectly still relative to each other at the beginning.

So when the propeller/turbine turns on and applies force to the air the air is rapidly propelled backwards at high velocity. Where does the equal and opposite force come from to hold the plane perfectly still?

The treadmill.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Smilin
Does the spinning wheel then impart any force on me? A tiny bit, yes. Enough to yank me backwards at the speed of the moving conveyor (like is magically happening with your plane). Of course not. That's retarded.

Of courses your retard. No one is saying you would go backwards at the speed of the treadmill and no one is say you can't move faster then a treadmill.

I'm saying that if you read the question such that the treadmill tracks the speed of the plane relitive to the treadmill surface the plane will not move that is all.

Alright looky we need wrap up here before the weekend because I'm just not interested enough in this boring ******. I'm going to number my lines here even so you can tell me exactly where you dispute me. Things you said are not numbered. You are not allowed to dispute yourself.

Ok, first I'm going to restate the question from the OP and list one further assumption
"You have an airplane on a conveyor belt - when the airplane moves forward, the conveyor matches its speed in reverse."
My assumption: The air, the plane and the treadmill are all perfectly still relative to each other at the beginning. (no line number on this...state so directly if you disagree)

1. Note one very important point: "when the airplane moves". It happens to also say "forward" but that is not important. What is important is the "moves" part.
2. That by definition means the airplane cannot have a speed of zero at some point in time.
3. It may start with a speed of zero. It must, at some point, NOT have a speed of zero because it "moves".
4. speed is the change in distance between two points over time.
5. We now gotta pause here and pick our two points to determine what speed we are talking about. I personally think this is where you spin off into a paradox..we'll see...
5A - Airspeed... point 1 is the air. Point 2 is the plane.
5B - Groundspeed... point 1 is on the treadmill surface. Point 2 is the plane.
6. Per your quote above, "the treadmill tracks the speed of the plane relitive to the treadmill surface" I believe you mean 5B, groundspeed...we'll proceed with that....so here we go?

"the plane will not move" (your statement. no line number. you cannot dispute)

7. You have now created a paradox. The question states "when the airplane moves" and you state, "the plane whill not move".

The end.

The plane moves on the treadmill. It doesn't move relitive to ground. There goes your paradox.

Ah, I see. That means we have now transitioned from a logical paradox to violating newtons third law:

"For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction"

Let's pause here and again restate the question plus my assumption:
"You have an airplane on a conveyor belt - when the airplane moves forward, the conveyor matches its speed in reverse."
My assumption: The air, the plane and the treadmill are all perfectly still relative to each other at the beginning.

So when the propeller/turbine turns on and applies force to the air the air is rapidly propelled backwards at high velocity. Where does the equal and opposite force come from to hold the plane perfectly still?

The treadmill.

You still have a problem with newtons third law:
1. How does the treadmill apply force against the engine without the wheel parking brake on? It can only apply rotational force to the tire, the ball bearings prevent it from applying linear force to the axel.

You still have a paradox:
2. How does the treadmill ever START moving if it has to MATCH the speed of something at a perfect standstill?