![]() |
Re: Snowflakes
Quote:
But what I do understand is that guessing, estimating, call it what you like, the physical parameters of a snowflake in terms of accuracy, is an impossibility. Any estimate can only be a wild guess, but a wild guess is better than nothing. |
Re: Snowflakes
Quote:
As you already said, snowflakes are complex things, but one constant is that they all generally fall at a gentle rate compared to hail and rain because they are less dense than these items. So, while large, the density of the snowflake should be comparable to a small one, so should fall at the same rate. After all, a feather weighing a tonne would still fall like a feather because it is other factors, like surface area and aerodynamics, drag etc that determine the fall rate, the same applies here. The reason it would've been able to be observed, and likely isn't a wind up is for that reason, it would likely have fell to the ground safely, like most snowflakes. |
Re: Snowflakes
Quote:
You are wrong in practically every word. You must have left school whilst in short pants to say things like that. How utterly ridiculous. If a feather weighed a ton, it would drop like a ton. It would no longer be a feather. Mass, shape and surface area determine drag. Terminal velocity is proportional to mass. The reason a feather floats down slowly is that it has a tiny mass and a large surface area. If it weighed a ton, it would drop like a ton and make a huge crater in Mother Earth`s crust on impact. Come off it, pick up your text books and start again. Have you never heard the oldie - "What falls faster, a pound of feathers or a pound of peas ?" |
Re: Snowflakes
Quote:
Not only do you disregard density completely, but do so in spectacular style. A quick question for you, how heavy is an iceberg? If the answer is "A lot" now ask why do they not fall to the bottom of the ocean? When you answer that, come back to me and remember that a pound of feathers only falls the same rate as a pound of peas in a vacuum. If mass only determined rates of falling etc, planes would never work, birds couldn't fly etc etc. Note: If a feather weighted a tonne, it would be flipping huge in area, and thus, the same dynamics of drag would apply. It would still fall, like a feather. Edit: Remember, Mass and Weight are 2 different things. :) |
Re: Snowflakes
Quote:
Cheers Mr North |
Re: Snowflakes
Quote:
The feathers/peas/mass comparison is not dropping these objects from 2,000 feet where air resistance looms up - called drag in the industry. It concerns dropping them from a few feet, where gravity is the only factor in the equation. A feather with the same mass as a piece of lead as per your example, when dropped from a few feet will both hit the ground at exactly the same time on this very Planet we all love. Any idiot knows that air resistance or drag is paramount in determining the terminal velocity of a specific body mass falling from a great height and is proportional to body mass and surface area. Ever heard of a parachute Grim ? |
Re: Snowflakes
Quote:
Admit you're a good example of a little knowledge being a dangerous thing and there are many people out there (and on here by the looks of it) who seem to know a little bit more about a lot more things than you do. Waiting for you're FINAL post on the matter like you seem to do in all your threads. Cheers Mr North |
Re: Snowflakes
Quote:
If I have a little knowledge, then it is a hell of a lot more than the people you so kindly refer to. OK Grimbo, I admit that I made a mistake and apologise for it. A stupid over-sight on my part. Start again. Even at a few feet, shape comes into it since air resistance does matter when a body is light and has a relatively large area. A single feather with the same mass as a piece of lead, both having the same shape when dropped from a few feet, will hit the ground last due to the feathers many segregated strands creating drag. But a bag of feathers weighing one pound and a bag of peas weighing one pound will hit the ground at the same time. In a vacuum, the identical feather and lead particles will hit the ground at the same time. Now Grimbo, I resent your insulting personal remarks,which are quite unnecessary, so you are going on my Ignore list. |
Re: Snowflakes
Having resorted to ignoring everyone, except the Mods, I reckon the OP will be arguing with himself soon. Maybe it's many years of 'distinctive and distiguished' experience doing just that which has led to him referring to himself in the first and third person in the same post... :D
|
Re: Snowflakes
Quote:
|
Re: Snowflakes
Quote:
|
Re: Snowflakes
Quote:
|
Re: Snowflakes
Think I'll use Mr North all the time from now on. I won't bother quoting our learned friend as I'm on ignore so won't get a response ;) but from my experience in life it's often the case that when someone feel the need to claim they are intelligent it's normally diametrically opposed to the reality!
The thing that astounds me is he wants a 'scientific' debate but I pointed out an error in a statement (quite politely for me I thought) and I end up being called Grimbo (quite like that one too - I could use that one at Christmas - Grimbo at Crimbo!!). I wonder what the response would have been if I'd have questioned the snowflakes are 50% air assumption? Cheers Mr North |
Re: Snowflakes
Quote:
|
Re: Snowflakes
Quote:
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:47. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum