the problem is that people don’t understand that as the jet engines push the plane, the treadmill doesn’t hold it down or push it backwards(nor keep it in place).
if a space ship were going the speed of light and it turns on it’s highbeams, what happens?
boy, how pissed will EVERYONE be if the myth is “plausable” or “unconfirmed”? Anything but “Confirmed” or “Busted” would be completely unacceptable.
i really don’t think they’ll be able to confirm or bust it… because of the way it’s worded. it all depends on the wording.
[quote=“badazzss,post:344,topic:37377"”]
i really don’t think they’ll be able to confirm or bust it… because of the way it’s worded. it all depends on the wording.
[/quote]
What do you mean? I think it’s worded perfectly.
wtf does wording have to do with it? The plane will take off no matter how fast the treadmill is going.
[quote=“badazzss,post:344,topic:37377"”]
i really don’t think they’ll be able to confirm or bust it… because of the way it’s worded. it all depends on the wording.
[/quote]
FYI, How the question is worded on their website:
“If a plane is traveling at takeoff speed on a conveyor belt, and the belt is matching that speed in the opposite direction, can the plane take off?”
yea that wording was weird…
[quote=“LAFENGAS,post:343,topic:37377"”]
boy, how pissed will EVERYONE be if the myth is “plausable” or “unconfirmed”? Anything but “Confirmed” or “Busted” would be completely unacceptable.
[/quote]
I rarely watch the show any more because the approach taken is many times laughable. Its entertaining, however I would hardly use it as proof one way or another on many items.
I would rate it at one step above using CSI as a reference. Doesn’t make it any less appealing.
[quote=“sureshot007,post:347,topic:37377"”]
wtf does wording have to do with it? The plane will take off no matter how fast the treadmill is going.
[/quote]
Well, it gets slightly less “doable” in a real world sense if you change the wording to refect that it is matching the wheels speed as opposed to the planes speed. Esp. w/out more explicit definition of what one means with “wheel speed” which is why the question is worded matching the planes speed.
Regardless, it would still take off, its just more theoretical because you’d end up in quite the loop trying to get the conveyor speed to match the wheel speed.
[quote=“BluBalls,post:342,topic:37377"”]
if a space ship were going the speed of light and it turns on it’s highbeams, what happens?
[/quote]
An optic boom. Obviously.
[quote=“Fry,post:352,topic:37377"”]
An optic boom. Obviously.
[/quote]
:lol:
[quote=“newman,post:281,topic:37377"”]
but some part of me wants to tend this thing to infinity…
[/quote]
OK I’m here.
First of all, anyone who thinks that the plane might not take off should stop reading now. If you can’t wrap your head around the concept of the wheels/runway approximating a frictionless surface then you won’t get what I’m about to explain.
IF… The question reads: “The treadmill is equal to the wheel speed of the plane, but in the opposite direction” then yes the treadmill speed is asymptotic with infinity. Here’s why:
By nature of their physical link, wheel speed is dependent on ground speed (aka treadmill speed.) If the control of the treadmill is based on wheel speed, then you have an infinite loop. If this experiment is controlled by a computer program, the compiler will crash. Get it? Wheel speed is dependent on ground speed, but ground speed is dependent on wheel speed. :bloated:
So say you have the plane moving forward with the wheels moving at tangential velocity x, then the treadmill will have the velocity of -x. But wait, the plane is moving at a constant velocity regardless so wheel speed has become 2x. Plane speed - ground speed = x --x = 2x. But that means that treadmill speed is -2x to equal negative wheel speed. But that means that since the plane is still moving independently at it’s constant velocity, wheel speed has become -4x. But that means that treadmill = -4x, so wheel speed = -8x, and treadmill -8x, and wheel -16x, and treadmill -16x, and wheel -32x… On till infinity.
BUT, IF treadmill speed is dependent on plane speed (not wheel speed) then no problem. The plane moves independent of wheel/ground speed so no infinite loop. The plane moves dependent on relative air speed. Which is what this entire “riddle” depends on.
Get it?
[quote=“Fry,post:354,topic:37377"”]
OK I’m here.
First of all, anyone who thinks that the plane might not take off should stop reading now. If you can’t wrap your head around the concept of the wheels/runway approximating a frictionless surface then you won’t get what I’m about to explain.
IF… The question reads: “The treadmill is equal to the wheel speed of the plane, but in the opposite direction” then yes the treadmill speed is asymptotic with infinity. Here’s why:
By nature of their physical link, wheel speed is dependent on ground speed (aka treadmill speed.) If the control of the treadmill is based on wheel speed, then you have an infinite loop. If this experiment is controlled by a computer program, the compiler will crash. Get it? Wheel speed is dependent on ground speed, but ground speed is dependent on wheel speed. :bloated:
So say you have the plane moving forward with the wheels moving at tangential velocity x, then the treadmill will have the velocity of -x. But wait, the plane is moving at a constant velocity regardless so wheel speed has become 2x. Plane speed - ground speed = x --x = 2x. But that means that treadmill speed is -2x to equal negative wheel speed. But that means that since the plane is still moving independently at it’s constant velocity, wheel speed has become -4x. But that means that treadmill = -4x, so wheel speed = -8x, and treadmill -8x, and wheel -16x, and treadmill -16x, and wheel -32x… On till infinity.
BUT, IF treadmill speed is dependent on plane speed (not wheel speed) then no problem. The plane moves independent of wheel/ground speed so no infinite loop. The plane moves dependent on relative air speed. Which is what this entire “riddle” depends on.
Get it?
[/quote]
This is where I initially got confused. The question is tricky because of the wording and you are spot on. I interpereted it as the first example and intially said way back when that the plane would not take off because of that idea.
wheels = x, treadmill = -x
plane doesn’t slow down, so wheels become 2x
wheels = 2x, treadmill = -2x
plane doesn’t slow down, so wheels become 4x
wheels = 4x, treadmill = -4x
plane doesn’t slow down, so wheels become -8x
wheels = 8x, treadmill = -8x
plane doesn’t slow down, so wheels become -16x
[quote=“Fry,post:356,topic:37377"”]
wheels = x, treadmill = -x
plane doesn’t slow down, so wheels become 2x
wheels = 2x, treadmill = -2x
plane doesn’t slow down, so wheels become 4x
wheels = 4x, treadmill = -4x
plane doesn’t slow down, so wheels become -8x
wheels = 8x, treadmill = -8x
plane doesn’t slow down, so wheels become -16x
[/quote]
Yeah… I got that the first time you posted it… :loopie:
Eh, I typed that before you posted. Then my sister called before I had hit “submit” and I talked on the phone for a while, and didn’t want to waste the effort of having typed all that. 
[quote=“Fry,post:358,topic:37377"”]
Eh, I typed that before you posted. Then my sister called before I had hit “submit” and I talked on the phone for a while, and didn’t want to waste the effort of having typed all that. 
[/quote]
And then a unicorn trotted out of your butt and started going on myspace on your computer which also prevented you from typing… Right?
Where is cubancrisis when we need him. He’s an aeronautical engineer isnt he?