Net forces but weight is not the net force! Weight won't change unless the mass changes.
What Myth would you want to see busted?
- Thread starter Linkex
- Start date
Net forces but weight is not the net force! Weight won't change unless the mass changes.
It will still be 1000, you aren't spinnin the pistons in the opposite direction at 1000rpm.
You scenario of cancelling forces would however work on an electric motor.
As part of what the motor workings is attached to the casing. The permanent magnets. So in this case the shaft would have a zero speed, relative to ground. But a relative speed to the motor casing of 1000
You scenario of cancelling forces would however work on an electric motor.
As part of what the motor workings is attached to the casing. The permanent magnets. So in this case the shaft would have a zero speed, relative to ground. But a relative speed to the motor casing of 1000
Weight is most definitely a net force. (edit: well maybe not definitely, I'm just positing)
F=ma.
![[FnG]magnolia](/styles/overclockers/avatars/9.png){kind=avatar}
Caporegime
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 28,767
- Location
- Auckland
Are you guys enjoying the debate or is this 'SOMEONE ON THE INTERNET IS WRONG!' territory? I've nothing to add, I'm simply curious.
It's also an amazing and amusing read, for what it's worth
It's also an amazing and amusing read, for what it's worth
It's never the net force though as there will always be other forces acting on it.
No your spinning the engine block attched to the helicopter.
That (when the engine is firing) is 'attached' by explosive force to the pistons.
No free moving element
And which way are you rotating the pistons, they aren't in the same direction as they are horizontal, not rotational. The free moving elelement is the crankshaft.
I can't belive this. The pistons are acting around a common rotational centre, the crankshaft, which IS being rotated in the opposite direction.
The motor comparison is wacko tbh. Lots of what makes an engine works is also attached to the casing.
I'm going to give up now. I really don't know how to make it any simpler. You stick to what you believe buddy
I'm going for a drink
Wikpeda says we both win.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weight
I personally think strictly limiting it to gravitational constants is a bit arbitrary and pointless.
But the cranshaft isn't free moving as when the engine is fired it has power transfered directly to it and through it into the rotors.
Really? Trying that now.
In relation to the body.
Anyway this is pointless. Let's hope myth busters do it.
If I'm wrong I'm wrong.
I have never seen that other definition in my life :O. I don't know how common it is, certainly not familiar with me.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 28,767
- Location
- Auckland
Exactly and the body is spinning the oppoiste way.