Re: Physics graduate from Daryn\'s alma mater\'s answer
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How can a CPA understand this (thanks to Patrick [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] ) and engineering types can't [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]
[/ QUOTE ]
to be fair, these guys really aren't "engineering types"
i think the "physics types" have an edge over the "engineering types", although patrick is sort of both.
[/ QUOTE ]
the physics types assume the bearings are frictionless, whereas the engineering types live in the real world and account for these types of things [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]
[/ QUOTE ]
You can't back your way out of this one. Quit trying to pretend like you can't imagine frictionless bearings when you've already accepted a runway flying by at 29674967497694376mph. You were completely wrong and it wasn't because you didn't accept perfect bearings.
The only difference non-perfect bearings makes is that the engines would have to be strong enough to overcome whatever insiginificantly small effect the bearing friction would have. You could mount an engine on there that's strong enough to take off if you had the brakes on fully, let alone a little bit of bearing friction.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure this man owes Soiler $400.
|