Backwash Causes Lift?

wrote:
If a student wants to argue that the physics as presented are
all wrong he should do extensive research and publish a book on the
subject, not argue with pilots who have been trusting their soft pink
bodies to Bernoulli and Newton for decades.

Dan



You may add "wrinkled" to that list of adjectives for the "older" pilots
if you like
:-)

--
Dudley Henriques

"Gatt" wrote

I SWEAR to you guys, somebody sounding conspicuously like him was out here
within the last couple of months refuting Bournoulli and referring to
pressure under the wing, making plywood fly, etc. Sounds awful familiar.

You don't have to convince me. This one is as bad a K00K as has been here
for a while, and that's saying something.

He can say he has not changed his handle until he is blue in the face, and I
won't believe it.
--
Jim in NC

Crash Lander writes:

And we all know math has absolutely nothing to do with physical reality eh?

Modern physicists tend to understand math but not physics. They develop their
theories in mathematical terms, and explain them in mathematical terms, but
when asked to explain them in physical terms are unable to do so. This makes
them different from their more illustrious predecessors. For these modern
physicists, math has replaced reality, because they don't really understand
reality. They believe that if the math works, that's reality. Unfortunately,
there are infinitely many mathematical models that will work, but they don't
necessarily have anything to do with reality.

You won't be able to find anyone who can explain string theory without using
math. But Einstein could explain physics without math.

Tony writes:

For a theory to be accepted it has to predict observations. Trailing
edge downwash and some other things written here don't seem to do
that.

Actually, downwash can be directly observed in appropriate atmospheric
conditions. There are pictures on the Web that illustrate this.

Remember, in order to accelerate something upward, something else must be
accelerated downward.

When you hold your hand out the window of a car at an angle, and you feel it
being raised, where does the energy to raise your hand come from?

Bertie the Bunyip writes:

Really_ i´ve nly seen you trying to explain it for a few months now.

Many books explain it incorrectly.

Dudley Henriques writes:

AOA actually can be defined relative to any given reference datum, but
normally it's considered in the industry as being the angle formed
between the chord line of the wing and the relative wind as you have
correctly stated.

The angle of attack is the angle between the forward stagnation point and the
trailing stagnation point. The points of intersection of the chord line with
the airfoil surface are static, but the stagnation points can change, altering
the angle of attack.

If the angle of attack is not positive, there is no lift. You cannot have
lift at negative angles of attack because that is not symmetric. If a
negative angle of attack can produce positive lift, what happens when you turn
the airfoil upside down? Logically that would mean that even a positive angle
of attack would force the wing down, which makes no sense.

Gatt writes:

I SWEAR to you guys, somebody sounding conspicuously like him was out here
within the last couple of months refuting Bournoulli and referring to
pressure under the wing, making plywood fly, etc. Sounds awful familiar.

It's entirely possible for an opinion to be shared by several people, even if
that opinion is not shared by the president of the treehouse club.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Modern physicists tend to understand math but not physics.

Then you should have no problem naming a few who exhibit this problem.

Jim Logajan writes:

Then you should have no problem naming a few who exhibit this problem.

The ones who have the problem are unimportant, as they don't really understand
physics, anyway.

Jim Logajan wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:
Modern physicists tend to understand math but not physics.

Then you should have no problem naming a few who exhibit this problem.

Jim;
Why bother....really.

--
Dudley Henriques