Mythbusters to take on "the plane and the treadmill" conundrum?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Zenmervolt

Elite member
Oct 22, 2000
24,512
21
81
Originally posted by: Citrix
a tredmill matching the exact speed of a plane you would not get lift because the plane is not moving through space its stationary. all you have to do is open the window in the plane and stick your hand out you would feel no wind.
A treadmill matching the plane's airspeed would simply cause the wheels to rotate at twice airspeed (i.e. indicated groundspeed would be 2X airspeed). Airspeed would still increase.

A treadmill moving at the same speed as the wheels in all cases would cause a paradox leading to infinite wheel and treadmill speed. Airspeed would still increase.

As stated, there is no possible way for a treadmill to counteract the act of an airplane engine's thrust.

Now, if there were a giant fan behind the airplane that exactly matched the propeller/jet's thrust it might be different...

ZV
 

Rob9874

Diamond Member
Nov 7, 1999
3,314
1
0
Originally posted by: Citrix
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: Citrix
Originally posted by: Rob9874
I had started to post my reasons for thinking the plane will not take off, however, once I started typing, I convinced myself that it would. Here's why. The "will take off" people are thinking of the wheels as a car's. The car relies on the wheels to move it forward. On an airplane, the wheels are loose, and just there so the belly of the plane doesn't scrape along the runway.

Picture this scenario. Let's say you put your R/C plane on a treadmill, but you are beside the treadmill, with your hand on the plane. If you held the plane steady, the treadmill would be moving and the wheels of the plane would be spinning. But what would happen if you pushed the plane up the treadmill? Do you think that as long as the treadmill kept up with the speed of the wheels, you would not be able to push the plane from the back of the treadmill belt to the front? The wheels would just skid forward on the treadmill belt. That works, because the force pushing it forward (your hand), is not affected by the treadmill moving backwards. That is the same concept of engine thrust. It's an "invisible hand" pushing the airplane forward, independent of the treadmill.
plane is still stationary, no wind no lift.
As explained a half-dozen times already, the plane does not remain stationary.

ZV

sorry but i belive it does. how can it move if the treadmill matches the speed of the plane exactly? like running on a treadmill if you set the treadmill to go at 6mph and you run at that speed to stay in the middle of the treadmill tread you are not moving in space you are stationary.

Because unlike the plane, for you to move forward, you rely on the friction of the ground to propel you forward. Same with a car. With the plane, it's moving forward because it's being pushed forward by thrust (invisible hand). The treadmill could be moving backwards at 1,000,000 mph, and it would still thrust forward.
 

Zenmervolt

Elite member
Oct 22, 2000
24,512
21
81
Originally posted by: Citrix
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: Citrix
Originally posted by: Rob9874
I had started to post my reasons for thinking the plane will not take off, however, once I started typing, I convinced myself that it would. Here's why. The "will take off" people are thinking of the wheels as a car's. The car relies on the wheels to move it forward. On an airplane, the wheels are loose, and just there so the belly of the plane doesn't scrape along the runway.

Picture this scenario. Let's say you put your R/C plane on a treadmill, but you are beside the treadmill, with your hand on the plane. If you held the plane steady, the treadmill would be moving and the wheels of the plane would be spinning. But what would happen if you pushed the plane up the treadmill? Do you think that as long as the treadmill kept up with the speed of the wheels, you would not be able to push the plane from the back of the treadmill belt to the front? The wheels would just skid forward on the treadmill belt. That works, because the force pushing it forward (your hand), is not affected by the treadmill moving backwards. That is the same concept of engine thrust. It's an "invisible hand" pushing the airplane forward, independent of the treadmill.
plane is still stationary, no wind no lift.
As explained a half-dozen times already, the plane does not remain stationary.

ZV
sorry but i belive it does. how can it move if the treadmill matches the speed of the plane exactly? like running on a treadmill if you set the treadmill to go at 6mph and you run at that speed to stay in the middle of the treadmill tread you are not moving in space you are stationary.
That's because running is fundamentally different. You're falling into the same trap that most people fall into.

When you run, your thrust comes relative to the ground.

An airplane's thrust comes relative to the surrounding air. Groundspeed is completely and utterly irrelevant to whether an airplane moves.

ZV
 

Tom

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
13,293
1
76
Originally posted by: Rob9874
Originally posted by: Tom
"The wheels would just skid forward on the treadmill belt. "

you may be correct, but that means the original problem is invalid, not that it's been "solved".

because the original problem does not permit the wheels to "skid".

I think this is the fundamental concept we all need to agree on. Because those that think it will move forward, are assuming the wheels will skid.

Think of my R/C plane scenario. Let's assume the treadmill is motorized and moving 100 mph. How am I able to move the plane from the back of the treadmill to the front at 1 mph, even though the treadmill is moving the wheels 100 mph?


It's easier for me to visualize if the wheels are not rotating, although I think it probably doesn't matter if they are.

If the wheels on your r/c plane are not rotating, and the treadmill is free to move in either direction, then when you push it forward, the wheels would not need to rotate at all, the treadmill would move forward at the same speed as the plane, correct ?

if so, i think it follows that no matter what speed the wheels are rotating at, the treadmill will always let you push it forward, or would let the prop pull it forward as fast as you wanted.

 

smack Down

Diamond Member
Sep 10, 2005
4,507
0
0
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: spidey07
As stated in the original description it is impossible for the plane to move forward.

No lift = no takeoff.
THe original description defies the laws of physics. You may as well say, "if bernouli's principle were reversed, would an airplane fly".

There is not, and will never be, a treadmill that can compensate for an airplane's thrust.

ZV

Which law of physics does it violate?
 

dmw16

Diamond Member
Nov 12, 2000
7,608
0
0
It amazes me that people are dumb enough to think a plan can fly because it's wheels are turning at 300mph.
 

Rob9874

Diamond Member
Nov 7, 1999
3,314
1
0
Originally posted by: Tom
Originally posted by: Rob9874
Originally posted by: Tom
"The wheels would just skid forward on the treadmill belt. "

you may be correct, but that means the original problem is invalid, not that it's been "solved".

because the original problem does not permit the wheels to "skid".

I think this is the fundamental concept we all need to agree on. Because those that think it will move forward, are assuming the wheels will skid.

Think of my R/C plane scenario. Let's assume the treadmill is motorized and moving 100 mph. How am I able to move the plane from the back of the treadmill to the front at 1 mph, even though the treadmill is moving the wheels 100 mph?


It's easier for me to visualize if the wheels are not rotating, although I think it probably doesn't matter if they are.

If the wheels on your r/c plane are not rotating, and the treadmill is free to move in either direction, then when you push it forward, the wheels would not need to rotate at all, the treadmill would move forward at the same speed as the plane, correct ?

if so, i think it follows that no matter what speed the wheels are rotating at, the treadmill will always let you push it forward, or would let the prop pull it forward as fast as you wanted.

That's exactly right! The spinning wheels are throwing people off, as if the spinning of the loose wheels at the bottom of the plane have anything to do with its speed.
 

Zenmervolt

Elite member
Oct 22, 2000
24,512
21
81
Originally posted by: dmw16
It amazes me that people are dumb enough to think a plan can fly because it's wheels are turning at 300mph.
The plane flies becauase it moves forwards at exactly the same speed as it would on a normal runway.

It amazes me that people are dumb enough to believe that it wouldn't move.

ZV
 

smack Down

Diamond Member
Sep 10, 2005
4,507
0
0
Originally posted by: Tom
Originally posted by: Rob9874
Originally posted by: Tom
"The wheels would just skid forward on the treadmill belt. "

you may be correct, but that means the original problem is invalid, not that it's been "solved".

because the original problem does not permit the wheels to "skid".

I think this is the fundamental concept we all need to agree on. Because those that think it will move forward, are assuming the wheels will skid.

Think of my R/C plane scenario. Let's assume the treadmill is motorized and moving 100 mph. How am I able to move the plane from the back of the treadmill to the front at 1 mph, even though the treadmill is moving the wheels 100 mph?


It's easier for me to visualize if the wheels are not rotating, although I think it probably doesn't matter if they are.

If the wheels on your r/c plane are not rotating, and the treadmill is free to move in either direction, then when you push it forward, the wheels would not need to rotate at all, the treadmill would move forward at the same speed as the plane, correct ?

if so, i think it follows that no matter what speed the wheels are rotating at, the treadmill will always let you push it forward, or would let the prop pull it forward as fast as you wanted.

You can push any object forward on a treadmill at constant speed. If the treadmill is going to match the speed the object moves on it then you can never move the object.
 

smack Down

Diamond Member
Sep 10, 2005
4,507
0
0
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: dmw16
It amazes me that people are dumb enough to think a plan can fly because it's wheels are turning at 300mph.
The plane flies becauase it moves forwards at exactly the same speed as it would on a normal runway.

It amazes me that people are dumb enough to believe that it wouldn't move.

ZV

The question states the plane wouldn't move. It amazes me that people are to dumb to read the question and instead just make up what ever question they want to answer.
 

Zenmervolt

Elite member
Oct 22, 2000
24,512
21
81
Originally posted by: smack Down
You can push any object forward on a treadmill at constant speed. If the treadmill is going to match the speed the object moves on it then you can never move the object.
Wrong. There is insufficient friction in the wheels to cause this. As stated, if the treadmill matches the object's forward speed, the wheels simply spin twice as fast for a given groundspeed.

ZV
 

randay

Lifer
May 30, 2006
11,019
216
106
theyll probably save this one for the very last episode, and go out with a bang that would rock.
 

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,648
201
106
Originally posted by: spidey07
As stated in the original description it is impossible for the plane to move forward.

No lift = no takeoff.


The original question makes no such claims... I have bolded it for you., along with the columnists comment directly refuting your claim...


The Pilot's Lounge #94: It's The Medium, Manfred Email this article |Print this article
There's a new aviation myth running around the Internet. It involves a conveyer-belt runway and misuse of aerodynamics and ... well, it's better if AVweb's Rick Durden explains it all himself in The Pilot's Lounge.
By Rick Durden, Columnist


The Pilot's Lounge
I heard the commotion as I started down the hall from the flight school to the Pilot's Lounge at the virtual airport. In the few moments it took to get to the door of the Lounge, individual voices became clear, split into two very vocal camps: The vehement "Yes it will!" calls being answered by an equally intense "No it won't!" I thought back to some of the stronger disagreements that had been aired here, such as the use of flaps on landing, but this one seemed a little louder and I wondered whether Old Hack and some of the bigger guys might have to separate combatants.
I stood off to the side and tried to get a handle on the conflict. Old Hack saw me and sidled over with a silly grin on his face. "These guys spend way too much time on the Internet," he said. "Someone has just come up with what looks like a 21st-century version of the old "downwind turn" foolishness and now the engineers and the soft-science folks are having at it."
...long unrelated part of the article omitted...


Conveyer-Belt Runway
What I learned from Old Hack was that an updated version of a question aimed at confusing folks over relative measurements of airplane motion and the medium in which it operates had shown up on the Internet, and it was causing the fracas in the Lounge.
The question that has been going around is not particularly artfully worded, and I think that has caused some of the disagreements, but I'll repeat it as it is shown: "On a day with absolutely calm wind, a plane is standing on a runway that can move (some sort of band conveyor). The plane moves in one direction, while the conveyor moves in the opposite direction. The conveyor has a control system that tracks the plane speed and tunes the speed of the conveyor to be exactly the same (but in the opposite direction). Can the airplane ever take off?"

My comment: Notice that the question does not state that the conveyor's movement keeps the airplane over the starting position relative to the ground, just that it moves in the direction opposite to any movement of the airplane.
Initially, about a third of the folks here said that the airplane could not ever takeoff, because the conveyor would overcome the speed of the airplane and it could never get any airspeed. The rest said the airplane would fly.
The "It won't fly, Rocky" group said that the conveyor would hold back the airplane. They asked us to imagine a person running on a treadmill. As he or she sped up, the treadmill would be programmed to speed up, just as the conveyor in the problem, and the person would remain over the same locus on the earth, while running as fast as possible.
The argument was that if the airplane started to move forward, the conveyor program was set up to move the conveyor at exactly that speed, in the opposite direction, thus, the airplane would never move relative to the ground, and, because the air was calm, it could never get any wind over its wings. One of the analogies presented was the person rowing at three mph upstream in a river on a calm day. However, the current was flowing downstream at three mph, so the resultant speed with reference to the stream bank and air was zero, and thus there was no wind on the rowboat.
I watched and listened to the disagreement for a while and was fascinated to see that the argument seemed to split between those who had some engineering or math background, all of whom said the airplane would takeoff and fly without any problem; and those with some other background, who visualized the airplane as having to push against the conveyor in order to gain speed. Because the conveyor equaled the airplane's push against the conveyor, the airplane stayed in one place over the ground and in the calm air could not get any airspeed and fly.
It was an interesting argument, but as things progressed, more rational heads prevailed, pointing out that the airplanes do not apply their thrust via their wheels, so the conveyor belt is irrelevant to whether the airplane will takeoff. One guy even got one of those rubber band powered wood and plastic airplane that sell for about a buck, put it on the treadmill someone foolishly donated to the Lounge years ago, thinking that pilots might actually exercise. He wound up the rubber band, set the treadmill to be level, and at its highest speed. Then he simultaneously set the airplane on the treadmill and let the prop start to turn. It took off without moving the slightest bit backwards.


Manfred In The 21st Century
OK, let's figure out why the airplane will fly.
We'll use Manfred again. Although we're bringing him forward into the 21st Century, we'll still let him use the 65 hp J-3. It doesn't really matter what airplane he flies, but he got used to the J-3 while he was demonstrating downwind turns and this one happens to have lifting rings on the top of the fuselage. It's also been modified with a starter so no one has to swing the prop.
Manfred's in the airplane. Old Hack has the Army-surplus crane fired up and he's picking up the J-3 and Manfred and carrying them over to Runway 27, which has been transformed into a 3,000-foot conveyor belt. It is a calm day. The conveyor drive is programmed so that if Manfred can start to move in the J-3, if he can generate any airspeed or groundspeed, the conveyor will move toward the east (remember Manfred and the J-3 are facing west) at exactly the speed of the air/groundspeed. Because the wind is calm, if Manfred can generate any indicated airspeed, he will also be generating precisely the same groundspeed. Groundspeed, of course being relative to the ground of the airport surrounding the conveyor belt runway. So, the speed of the conveyor belt eastbound will be the same as Manfred's indicated airspeed, westbound.
Manfred does his prestart checklist, holds the heel brakes, hits the starter and the little Continental up front clatters to life. Oil pressure comes up and stabilizes and Manfred tries to look busy because the eyes of the world are upon him, but all he can do is make sure the fuel is on and the altimeter and trim are set, then do a quick runup to check the mags and the carb heat. He moves the controls through their full travel and glares at the ailerons, doing his best to look heroic, then holds the stick aft in the slipstream to pin the tail and lets go of the brakes.


Baron of the Belt
So far the J-3 has not moved, nor has the conveyor. At idle power, there's not enough thrust to move the J-3 forward on a level surface, so Manfred starts to bring up the power, intending to take off. The propeller rpm increases and the prop shoves air aft, as it does on every takeoff, causing the airplane to move forward through the air, and as a consequence, forward with regard to the ground. Simultaneously the conveyor creaks to life, moving east, under the tires of the J-3. As the J-3 thrusts its way through the air, driven by its propeller, the airspeed indicator comes off the peg at about 10 mph. At that moment the conveyor is moving at 10 mph to the east and the tires are whirling around at 20 mph because the prop has pulled it to an airspeed, and groundspeed, of 10 mph, westbound. The airplane is moving relative to the still air and the ground at 10 mph, but with regard to the conveyor, which is going the other way at 10 mph, the relative speed is 20 mph.
Manfred relaxes a bit because the conveyor cannot stop him from moving forward. There is nothing on the airplane that pushes against the ground or the conveyor in order for it to accelerate; as Karen -- one of our techies here at the Lounge -- put it, the airplane freewheels. In technical terms, there is some bearing drag on the wheels, but it's under 40 pounds, and the engine has overcome that for years; plus the drag doesn't increase significantly as the wheel speed increases. Unless Manfred applies the brakes, the conveyor cannot affect the rate at which the airplane accelerates.
A few moments later, the roaring Continental, spinning that wooden Sensenich prop, has accelerated the J-3 and Manfred to 25 mph indicated airspeed. He and the airplane are cruising past the cheering spectators at 25 mph, while the conveyor has accelerated to 25 mph eastbound, yet it still has no way of stopping the airplane's movement through the air. The wheels are spinning at 50 mph, so the noise level is a little high, but otherwise, the J-3 is making a normal, calm-wind takeoff.
As the indicated airspeed passes 45 mph, groundspeed -- you know, relative to where all those spectators are standing beside the conveyor belt -- is also 45 mph. (At least that's what it says on Manfred's GPS. Being brought back to life seemed to create an insatiable desire for electronic stuff.) The conveyor is also at 45 mph, and the wheels are whizzing around at 90 -- the groundspeed plus the speed of the conveyor in the opposite direction.
Manfred breaks ground, climbs a few hundred feet, then makes a low pass to see if he can terrify the spectators because they are Americans, descendants of those who defeated his countrymen back in 1918.


It's All About Airspeed (Don't try this at home!)
While the speed of the conveyor belt in the opposite direction is superficially attractive in saying the airplane cannot accelerate, it truly is irrelevant to what is happening with the airplane, because the medium on which it is acting is the air. The only time it could be a problem is if the wheel speed got so high that the tires blew out.
Put another way, consider the problem with the J-3 mounted on a hovercraft body (yes, similar things were tried about 30 years ago). The hovercraft lifts the airplane a fraction of an inch above the conveyor belt, and so no matter how fast the conveyor spins, it cannot prevent the propeller -- acting on the air -- from accelerating the airplane to takeoff speed. It's the same with wheels rolling on the conveyor belt. Those wheels are not powered and thus do not push against the belt to accelerate the airplane. Were that the case, the vehicle could not reach an airspeed needed to fly, because then the conveyor, the medium acted upon by the propulsive force, would be able to negate the acceleration relative to the air and ground.
I'm reminded of the New York Times editorial when Robert Goddard's rocket experiments were first being publicized. The author of the editorial said that rockets can't work in space because they have nothing to push against. It was laughably wrong, ignoring one of Sir Isaac's laws of physics that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Here the propeller is pushing against the air, as it does every time an airplane takes off. How fast the airplane is moving over the surface on which its wheels rest is irrelevant; the medium is the magic. On a normal takeoff -- no conveyor involved -- if there is a 20 mph headwind, Manfred and the J-3 will lift off at 45 mph indicated airspeed; but relative to the ground, it is only 25 mph. Should the wind increase to 45 mph and if Manfred can get to the runway, he can take off without rolling an inch. His airspeed is 45 and groundspeed is zero. It is not necessary to have any groundspeed to fly, just airspeed. Conversely, if Manfred has a lot of runway and no
thing to hit, and takes off downwind in a 25 mph tailwind, the propeller will have to accelerate the airplane to a zero airspeed, which will be a 25 mph groundspeed, and then on to a 45 mph airspeed, which will have him humming across the ground at 70 mph. The speed over the ground, or a conveyor belt, when an airplane takes off is irrelevant; all that matters is its speed through the air, and unless the pilot sets the brakes, a moving conveyor belt -- under the freely turning wheels -- cannot stop the process of acceleration.
Things eventually calmed down as the number of "it won't fly" folks dwindled as they began to understand that the airplane would take off. Old Hack looked at me and suggested we depart as the few holdouts showed no sign of changing their position. So, we headed out into the night to watch the guys take the conveyor out and reinstall the runway.

See you next month.
 

Linflas

Lifer
Jan 30, 2001
15,395
78
91
Originally posted by: RedArmy
I have an idea...who the hell cares.

It's a very simple concept that the Wright brothers understood in the early 1900's and it is scary that in 2007 so many people don't have a basic understanding of the principles of flight. The treadmill and wheels are red herrings and really have nothing to do with the problem. The plane takes off because of thrust provided by the engines against air provides sufficient forward motion to generate lift by the wings. If the thrust was being provided by a motor driving the wheels then in fact it would not take off but because thrust is being provided by either a jet engine or propeller the plane will move forward no matter what the treadmill and wheels are doing.
 

Rob9874

Diamond Member
Nov 7, 1999
3,314
1
0
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: smack Down
You can push any object forward on a treadmill at constant speed. If the treadmill is going to match the speed the object moves on it then you can never move the object.
Wrong. There is insufficient friction in the wheels to cause this. As stated, if the treadmill matches the object's forward speed, the wheels simply spin twice as fast for a given groundspeed.

ZV

That's right. Forget what I said about wheels skidding. Not sure what I was thinking. The wheels would just spin faster. That means that the flaw in the problem is a treadmill that matches the speed of the wheels. With an independent force pushing it forward, the speed of the wheels will always be faster than the treadmill speed.
 

randay

Lifer
May 30, 2006
11,019
216
106
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: smack Down
You can push any object forward on a treadmill at constant speed. If the treadmill is going to match the speed the object moves on it then you can never move the object.
Wrong. There is insufficient friction in the wheels to cause this. As stated, if the treadmill matches the object's forward speed, the wheels simply spin twice as fast for a given groundspeed.

ZV

zenmer, please dont continue with smack down. please see the thread in HT about this same subject for the reason why.
 

Zenmervolt

Elite member
Oct 22, 2000
24,512
21
81
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: dmw16
It amazes me that people are dumb enough to think a plan can fly because it's wheels are turning at 300mph.
The plane flies becauase it moves forwards at exactly the same speed as it would on a normal runway.

It amazes me that people are dumb enough to believe that it wouldn't move.

ZV
The question states the plane wouldn't move. It amazes me that people are to dumb to read the question and instead just make up what ever question they want to answer.
The question, as stated, is impossible and therefore in error and irrelevant. Adjusting the question to be physically possible results in the aircraft flying. Furthermore, the question does NOT say that the aircraft remains stationary. The question only specifies that the treadmill matches the speed of the aircraft (in some cases, it says that the treadmill matches the rotational speed of the wheels).

As I have pointed out already, even if the treadmill matches the airplane's normal groundspeed, or even the wheel's rotational speed, the plane will still move forward.

ZV
 

Tom

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
13,293
1
76
I had to go through the same process the last time..at first I think the plane can't take off, then I think the problem is unsolvable, then finally I can see the solution..as others see faster than me, the motion of the wheels is irrelevant and the plane takes off.

 

smack Down

Diamond Member
Sep 10, 2005
4,507
0
0
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: smack Down
You can push any object forward on a treadmill at constant speed. If the treadmill is going to match the speed the object moves on it then you can never move the object.
Wrong. There is insufficient friction in the wheels to cause this. As stated, if the treadmill matches the object's forward speed, the wheels simply spin twice as fast for a given groundspeed.

ZV
No as stated the treadmill matches the speed of the object on the treadmill. It does not match the ground speed of the object. Otherwise the car would not have moved.

As long as the wheel are spinning a force is going to be applied to the axel that is porpotional to the speed the wheel is spinning.

Think about it.

If you put a plane on a treadmill and the planes engines are off do you really think it is just going to sit there.

 

smack Down

Diamond Member
Sep 10, 2005
4,507
0
0
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: dmw16
It amazes me that people are dumb enough to think a plan can fly because it's wheels are turning at 300mph.
The plane flies becauase it moves forwards at exactly the same speed as it would on a normal runway.

It amazes me that people are dumb enough to believe that it wouldn't move.

ZV
The question states the plane wouldn't move. It amazes me that people are to dumb to read the question and instead just make up what ever question they want to answer.
The question, as stated, is impossible and therefore in error and irrelevant. Adjusting the question to be physically possible results in the aircraft flying. Furthermore, the question does NOT say that the aircraft remains stationary. The question only specifies that the treadmill matches the speed of the aircraft (in some cases, it says that the treadmill matches the rotational speed of the wheels).

As I have pointed out already, even if the treadmill matches the airplane's normal groundspeed, or even the wheel's rotational speed, the plane will still move forward.

ZV

You still have not demostrated how the original problem is impossible.

Sure in your fanacy world were wheels don't require force to spin it is impossible but that isn't the case in the real world.
 

Zenmervolt

Elite member
Oct 22, 2000
24,512
21
81
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: smack Down
You can push any object forward on a treadmill at constant speed. If the treadmill is going to match the speed the object moves on it then you can never move the object.
Wrong. There is insufficient friction in the wheels to cause this. As stated, if the treadmill matches the object's forward speed, the wheels simply spin twice as fast for a given groundspeed.

ZV
No as stated the treadmill matches the speed of the object on the treadmill. It does not match the ground speed of the object. Otherwise the car would not have moved.

As long as the wheel are spinning a force is going to be applied to the axel that is porpotional to the speed the wheel is spinning.

Think about it.

If you put a plane on a treadmill and the planes engines are off do you really think it is just going to sit there.
The drag of the landing gear is infinitesimally small. Not enough to consider when compared to the thrust of the engine. If the engine is off, the drag of the landing gear is enough to cause the plane to "ride" the treadmill because there are no other forces acting at the moment. Once the engine is running, it becomes by far the dominant force, easily overcoming the drag of the landing gear. If the engine couldn't overcome the drag of the landing gear, the airplane wouldn't be able to take off even from a normal runway.

ZV
 

smack Down

Diamond Member
Sep 10, 2005
4,507
0
0
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: smack Down
You can push any object forward on a treadmill at constant speed. If the treadmill is going to match the speed the object moves on it then you can never move the object.
Wrong. There is insufficient friction in the wheels to cause this. As stated, if the treadmill matches the object's forward speed, the wheels simply spin twice as fast for a given groundspeed.

ZV
No as stated the treadmill matches the speed of the object on the treadmill. It does not match the ground speed of the object. Otherwise the car would not have moved.

As long as the wheel are spinning a force is going to be applied to the axel that is porpotional to the speed the wheel is spinning.

Think about it.

If you put a plane on a treadmill and the planes engines are off do you really think it is just going to sit there.
The drag of the landing gear is infinitesimally small. Not enough to consider when compared to the thrust of the engine. If the engine is off, the drag of the landing gear is enough to cause the plane to "ride" the treadmill because there are no other forces acting at the moment. Once the engine is running, it becomes by far the dominant force, easily overcoming the drag of the landing gear. If the engine couldn't overcome the drag of the landing gear, the airplane wouldn't be able to take off even from a normal runway.

ZV

The size of the forces doesn't matter because the treadmill can increase speed infinitly so it can apply an infinite amount of force.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |