ok..but would it work in the total vacuum of space, not in an O2 filled room? Since aerodynamics depend on...air, and the movement there of, I'm guessing it would just keep going in a str8 line? I didn't take physics, so anyone wanna help me out here?. And pimp...I agree, a throwing star would have been much more dramatic. Mitercut...Instant Karma's gonna get ya...
If you throw it in orbit from the ISS it will come down to earth sooner or later. There still are traces of the atmosphere up there that slow it down (as happens to the ISS).
bommerangs would not work in space as shown here, this is a setup. the boomerang would have to have a velocity enough to take it three times that far before it's rotation would start to curve it. screw that, FAKE!!!
you're wrong, that like saying a bullit wouldn't fly, there is NO resitance, you toss something and it would continue to travel over a long distance, think man.
Details of the boomerang experiment. "The boomerang that was used in the experiment on board the ISS was a design of Broadbent%u2019s called a %u201CRoomerang,%u201D a small, tri-blade boomerang intended for use indoors in a small area or outdoors in light winds. It travels 5 to 8 feet before returning to the thrower."
No, you're wrong. Infinity's well researched/spoken dissertation on the matter proves that you're wrong. He knows by sight the exact aerodynamic specifications of every 'bommerang' ever created. Evar.
Gravity would effect its performance, but only to the extent that it would not 'fall' to the center of the gravitational force being applied. That said, the effect of gravity on its aerodynamics, which is what makes it return to the thrower, would be negligible. Lift would still be created by the force of its wings through the self-contained atmosphere, the original force being supplied by the thrower. It is not the weight of an airplane that provides the necessary lift for take-off, but rather, the movement of the wing through the air. Once the velocity of the wing provides enough lift to counteract gravitational forces being applied to it, the plane flies. The lighter the plane with respect to wing surface area, the smaller the velocity required. Thus, in a hypothetical zero-G environement that posesses an atmosphere, it would take take only enough velocity through that atmosphere to produce lift to fly both a cessna 172 or a B747, since the 'weight' of both would be equal. Both planes would then continue to fly untill energy lost through friction with the atmosphere slowed them to a stop. And then they'd just hang there in the hypothetical atmosphere untill some force great enough to overcome their intertia was once again applied.
Yes, fans would work in zero-G too; same principal. The handle is in regard to operant conditioning, most famously explored by Pavlov, and his dogs and sung about by Mic Jagger. I try not to be media compliant, but continue to drool at the application of media stimulus like everyone else. I hope to a somewhat lesser extent.
Pavlov demonstrated classical conditioning in his dog experiment, not operant conditioning. In any case, I still think your psychic secretions are sexy.
You are right, it was classical conditioning. My psychic secretions are all operant conditioning, as opposed to the other secretions... Either would present in zero G, but the latter would have to be contained somehow.
If I was in zero gravity, what would I do.........hmmmm, errrrr,........I suppose I would, as a girl, for the first time in history, be the only women to not piss on my legs while peeing without a toilet. You see I could....no that wouldn't work....I could position myself in such a way.....no that wouldn't work.....if I went upside down I could, well I could..........hmmmmm......awwww crap. Why can't us girls take a piss outside like the boys, not even in zero gravity. Nevermind.
Comments (29)
To post a comment, you need to login or signup.