Comments John Farrier Likes

To quote a good friend of mine years ago when I was opining about this very thing, how the definition of beauty had changed significantly throughout the centuries... he replied "Well, no matter what body type/shape was seen to be ideal, one thing has always been (and probably always will be) considered beautiful... youth"
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
  1 reply
In the big picture, it is a minor issue as most people will gloss over that completely, or just see it as some small number. And I wouldn't expect most people re-posting it to pick up on that, but someone writing the original material should have known better if they were going to report on such a subject. Unless this thing was supposed to competing in the bell equivalent of the Kessel Run.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I've seen this story making the rounds, and several versions of it keep using the claim "1 nanoamp of power per ring" which is nonsensical. Amps are not a unit of power, and even when you can crudely treat it like power (e.g. you know the voltage), it isn't an amount per ring, it would be a rate that occurs over time. If the average current is ~1 nA, and the voltage is ~2 kV, it uses about 2 microwatts of power. And at two rings a second, that would be a microjoules of energy per ring.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
  2 replies
I watched the video several times hoping for a pop up window on what to do if the leaves are wet and slimy. Nothing. Very disappointed that this monkey was not able to adjust the lesson based on environment. I feel discriminated against because I live in a wet region.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
  1 reply
John, I watched the entirety of this video out of respect for you and your wife’s contributions to this site.

This pompous ass does nothing but slather balm on the not-yet-festering mental repetitive-stress-wounds of those disgusted graduates. While I could dispute this address line for line, let me just say:

I have only stood in *that* line twice. I am 58. Every single day, cashiers and waitresses say how pleased they are to see me. The collective “you” should figure out how to obtain the same. The advice given in this video will not do it.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
  2 replies
Wind chill comes from two parts: wind helping evaporation happen faster and the moving air preventing the build up of any heat in the air around your body (i.e. loss of an insulating layer of air, and no air partially warming up). If you look at a wind chill table of values, typically by the time you reach 50 mph, increasing the wind speed any more won't make much of a difference. Once all of the air in contact with your body is at ambient temperature, moving more air past it won't cool it any faster.

So the faster you go, the less an effect of cooling, while the effect of heating grows, even without breaking the sound barrier. Someone comments here it can be noticeable at ~63% the speed of sound. It looks like they are using the stagnation temperature, which assumes a parcel of air going from zero to full speed of the object it is hitting, then it would have to undergo some squeezing and heating. Most of the air doesn't do that around an object, as most of the air gets pushed aside instead of piling up in front of an object. Except, when going faster than sound it then has trouble moving out of the way fast enough, so then the heating really takes off there. So that estimate is a crude upper bound that becomes less crude above the speed of sound. At around the speed of sound, 17 C air would could reach up to 75 C piling up in front of a person. I've seen references in the past (maybe misremembering, can't find them at the moment) that humans can survive surprisingly high air temperatures for a couple minutes at a time, as in possibly approaching 100 C, but it probably doesn't take moving air into account.

The numbers are a bit different for airplanes, because they fly at altitudes where it is much colder than at the surface and they are more aerodynamic, but the heating on supersonic planes like the Concorde and SR71 is considerable. The Concorde would expand enough from thermal expansion to create a gap behind one of the control consoles in the cockpit, big enough that pilots stuck their hat in it when the Concorde retired. The SR-71 leaks fuel on the ground, because there are gaps in panels that close up once it gets to cruising speed.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Sure, you can fly at supersonic speeds. But you’ll freeze.

Actually because the air will warm up significantly as it crosses the supersonic shock wave, you might cook not freeze. It all depends on ambient conditions and velocity.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
  3 replies

Page 1 of 52       next | last

Profile for John Farrier

  • Member Since 2012/08/04


Blog Posts

  • Posts Written 13,546
  • Comments Received 44,554
  • Post Views 17,958,536
  • Unique Visitors 14,136,255
  • Likes Received 17,517


  • Threads Started 2,869
  • Replies Posted 1,462
  • Likes Received 820