Destroying Tornadoes

[TheWifeOfBrian]

I used to work in an insurance company now I manage a diner. Even I, Mrs. Desk-Bound MBA have more sense than certain posters here.


You do not have any IDEA how much power is released per unit of time by a weather event. We simply do not have anything that can generate enough power to affect 'em.

Period, the end.

 

[noknowes]

... but there is no way anyone with a brain can be stupid enough to believe that no energy is expended to stop a moving vehicle because the brakes release heat as a byproduct. And then he tells us WE have a poor understanding of physics.

Energy is released when a car is slowed down.

energy=1/2 m(v squared).

1/2 X m(v2-v1) squared. Are you aware of this equation?

V2 IS THE ORIGINAL.SPEED V1 IS THE LOWER SPEED AFTER SLOWING DOWN.m is the mass of the vehicle.

i suggest you plug some numbers into it.

do you dispute this fundamental equation of kinematics?

Do you understand dams.Hydroelectric power?

water slows down when turning turbines.the difference is converted to electricity.

do you understand now?

 

[chardman]

Better than you do, apparently.

Ya might want to read up on Newton's First and Third Laws. Here's a remedial accounting of it, that even you should be able to understand: LINK

Simply put, it takes as much energy to stop an object's motion as it took to get the object moving in the first place. To stop requires the application of an EQUAL BUT OPPOSITE FORCE.

We're talking the most basic of the basics here noknowes, and your assertion is in direct contradiction to it.

 

[Jadzia]

tornados don't have brakes

 

[Australis]

^

Ah, the humour in this thread never stops. Especially the unintentional sort.

 

[noknowes]

Better than you do, apparently.

Ya might want to read up on Newton's First and Third Laws. Here's a remedial accounting of it, that even you should be able to understand: LINK

Simply put, it takes as much energy to stop an object's motion as it took to get the object moving in the first place. To stop requires the application of an EQUAL BUT OPPOSITE FORCE.

We're talking the most basic of the basics here noknowes, and your assertion is in direct contradiction to it.

I am afraid you are in error.

A car or a truck travelling at 70 mph can be stopped simply by expending a few joules of energy.

i move my foot to the brake and the car or truck stops. no need for terrawatts of energy.

In a similar way the correct application of small amounts of directed energy at a critical part of the tornado will cause it to collapse.

A magnifying glass can set paper on fire at the correct focus from dilute sunchine.

a parabolic dish can receive dilute energy and focus it or it can radiate energy to a specific area.

Do you see now?

Do you understand?


I think you do not understand the concept of the relay in which a much smaller action controls a much larger action.I had to highlight this for you again.

 

[Amaris]

Your signature and edit:

Even when I am wrong I am still right! Last edited by noknowes; Today at 12:00 PM. Reason: educating chardman

I do not believe you understand any of what you say. You are obviously out of your league and your posts show it. You have not presented any data, merely assumptions and anecdotes. J.

 

[FordSVT]

... but there is no way anyone with a brain can be stupid enough to believe that no energy is expended to stop a moving vehicle because the brakes release heat as a byproduct. And then he tells us WE have a poor understanding of physics.

Energy is released when a car is slowed down.

energy=1/2 m(v squared).

1/2 X m(v2-v1) squared. Are you aware of this equation?

V2 IS THE ORIGINAL.SPEED V1 IS THE LOWER SPEED AFTER SLOWING DOWN.m is the mass of the vehicle.

i suggest you plug some numbers into it.

do you dispute this fundamental equation of kinematics?

Do you understand dams.Hydroelectric power?

water slows down when turning turbines.the difference is converted to electricity.

do you understand now?

I have a masters degree in engineering and I work with motors and turbines that make ones found in 18-wheelers look like toys. I used to work in the instrumentation department of a nuclear power plant. I've stood many times in the turbine room of Mactaquac hydroelectric generating station and I did a senior project for my BSc on hydroelectric generation. What degrees do you have? What is your field of expertise? Where have you worked?

What you appear to be arguing is that, because there is no net gain or loss of energy in the whole universe when you slam on the brakes, none is needed to stop the vehicle in the first place. Again, you're a fucking idiot. Or a troll. Either way you're useless to have a discussion with.

"water slows down when turning turbines.the difference is converted to electricity."

What the hell is that even supposed to mean? If I wrote something like that as an answer to anything on any test I've ever written my prof would have wrote "?????" in big red ink over it and given me a big fat "0/5".

At a most basic level even you should understand, the rotational speed of a generating turbine is determined by the properties of the blades (surface area, shape, angle, etc.) and the force the water is able to exert on them. The electricity generated is a function of the speed of the magnets attached to the rotor as they pass through induction coils (and the properties of the coils and a dozen other things but I digress...). It has nothing to do with "water slowing down". "Difference" of what? The difference between the speed of the water and the turbine? The speed of the water before and after it hit the turbine? Are you saying that a generator spinning at the same rate as the water moves makes no electricity? What are you trying to say, you illiterate boob?

BTW, I'm loving the "I had to avert my eyes from the pornz" nonsense up above, that was a nice touch, troll.

 

[chardman]

Gosh noknowes, By your rationale, an automobile uses almost no energy whether you're stopping or accelerating. After all, it only takes me a few joules of energy to depress the accelerator of my car, and make it accelerate up to 60mph. Certainly, no more energy on my part than is required to apply the brakes to make it stop.

Do you understand now? Or do you need me to underline something?

 

[Jadzia]

ok we've got some flaming going on here. Can we edit these or I WILL give warnings. It doesn't matter who you're addressing. Flaming is warnable.

 

[chardman]

Please. If ever there was a case for justified flaming, this is one of them. The guy makes any one of Mr Wizard's prepubescent assistants look like freakin' Nobel laureates by comparison. Still, in the spirit of your request, and general board decorum, I've edited my post accordingly.

 

[FordSVT]

His very presence here is flaming, and you "knowes" it.

The only reason this thread is still open is because it's amusing to a lot of people, you included, so let us continue the thrashing or simply close it. I'm perfectly happy with the either.

 

[noknowes]

... but there is no way anyone with a brain can be stupid enough to believe that no energy is expended to stop a moving vehicle because the brakes release heat as a byproduct. And then he tells us WE have a poor understanding of physics.

Energy is released when a car is slowed down.

energy=1/2 m(v squared).

1/2 X m(v2-v1) squared. Are you aware of this equation?

V2 IS THE ORIGINAL.SPEED V1 IS THE LOWER SPEED AFTER SLOWING DOWN.m is the mass of the vehicle.

i suggest you plug some numbers into it.

do you dispute this fundamental equation of kinematics?

Do you understand dams.Hydroelectric power?

water slows down when turning turbines.the difference is converted to electricity.

do you understand now?

The difference between the speed of the water and the turbine? The speed of the water before and after it hit the turbine? /QUOTE]


The speed of the water before and after it hit the turbine.

You forgot to focus on the relay.

 

[noknowes]

Gosh noknowes, By your rationale, an automobile uses almost no energy whether you're stopping or accelerating. After all, it only takes me a few joules of energy to depress the accelerator of my car, and make it accelerate up to 60mph. Certainly, no more energy on my part than is required to apply the brakes to make it stop.

Do you understand now? Or do you need me to underline something?

I never said anything about accelerating the car = starting a tornado.

i only said about stopping the car = dissipating the tornado.

You forgot the relay principle again.

 

[Amaris]

Energy is released when a car is slowed down.

energy=1/2 m(v squared).

1/2 X m(v2-v1) squared. Are you aware of this equation?

V2 IS THE ORIGINAL.SPEED V1 IS THE LOWER SPEED AFTER SLOWING DOWN.m is the mass of the vehicle.

i suggest you plug some numbers into it.

do you dispute this fundamental equation of kinematics?

Do you understand dams.Hydroelectric power?

water slows down when turning turbines.the difference is converted to electricity.

do you understand now?

The difference between the speed of the water and the turbine? The speed of the water before and after it hit the turbine? /QUOTE]


The speed of the water before and after it hit the turbine.

You forgot to focus on the relay.

Show the formula.

J.

 

[chardman]

The relay must trigger an action. You forgot to focus on that action. And you also forgot to focus on the energy needed to power that action. And, well, you also forgot to focus on the most basic of the laws of physics. And rudimentary common sense.

 

[Michael_One]

Relays are electromagnetic switches, think of the ignition in a car: you wouldn't want all that energy going through where you put the key in, do you? Except maybe in the 24th Century with all those exploding consoles...

Functionally relays are like flipping a light switch with a stick. The effort of flipping the switch doesn't power the light, the house electric supply circuit does. Why not turn off the house electric supply at the main breaker box and see if the lights come on when you flip the switch?

What happens when you step on the gas pedal in your car when the engine isn't on? Not a whole lot. ( well, maybe in a hybrid, for these cars don't put the key in )

These are easy experiments that anyone with a house or a car can do, if you don't have these things go over to a friend's place and try them. When you explain its for science I'm sure your friend will understand why you had to turn the house off at a dramatic moment during a ball game.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Better than you do, apparently.

Ya might want to read up on Newton's First and Third Laws. Here's a remedial accounting of it, that even you should be able to understand: LINK

Simply put, it takes as much energy to stop an object's motion as it took to get the object moving in the first place. To stop requires the application of an EQUAL BUT OPPOSITE FORCE.

We're talking the most basic of the basics here noknowes, and your assertion is in direct contradiction to it.

I am afraid you are in error.

A car or a truck travelling at 70 mph can be stopped simply by expending a few joules of energy.

i move my foot to the brake and the car or truck stops. no need for terrawatts of energy.

Law of conservation of energy. Your truck has X amount of kinetic energy while it is in motion. For it to CEASE being in motion, it has to transfer X amount of kinetic energy into some kind of OTHER energy. In the case of brakes, this energy is converted into heat as the brake pads apply pressure to the rotors and slow the rotation of the wheels.

To plug in the numbers: a 4 ton truck moving at 70mph has about 2KJ of kinetic energy. In order to stop, it must convert that energy into 2KJ of heat.

That you only have to apply about 20 joules to the brake pad doesn't make much difference, the brake pads do most of the work, just as in the inverse example in the act of accelerating where your 20 joules against the gas pedal only injects fuel into the engine.

In a similar way the correct application of small amounts of directed energy at a critical part of the tornado will cause it to collapse.

Tornadoes don't have brakes and aren't designed with a mechanical system that will cause them to collapse. Strictly speaking, the only way to accomplish what you describe would be to disrupt the weather systems that CAUSE tornadoes in the first place. You'd need a couple megawatts of heat applied to the right mass of air at the right time, but it's maybe kind of feasible as a preventative strategy.

With current technology, though, the best you could probably do is reduce the magnitude or duration of it but there isn't much else you can hope for.

 

[Sparky]

I propose an experiment noknowes. Step 1: Drive a 1 ton truck at 55mph, use 1 joule of energy and press the brake and measure how long it takes you to stop the truck.

Step 2: Have a friend drive the same truck at the same speed straight at you. Hold your foot out and at the proper moment expend the same 1 joule of energy by moving your foot forward and pressing against the bumper of the truck. Have your friend report back with the happy results

The result of the experiment you ask? The average IQ level on the planet goes up.

 

[Australis]

Sparky, I like the cut of yer jib!