Busting MythBusters.
NoEinstein
loss of air pressure in a 1930s era sea diving suit would cause the
diver’s body to… extrude into the head piece; and (2.) verify whether
a person can survive a jump from a building by landing in a dumpster.
I don’t fault the would-be-fatal results of (1.), only the expressed,
but errant, science behind it. The lower part of the diving suit is
constructed of heavy canvas. MythBusters claimed that by inflating
the suit with air, the water pressure at a depth of 300 feet can be
kept out. They supposed that having that “protective” air pressure
suddenly leak out would then allow the ocean water pressure to squeeze
the diver so hard that his body would ‘extrude’ into the helmet. But
the truth is: A fully inflated suit of canvas will CONSTANTLY be
exerting the exact force of the ocean pressure on the diver’s body the
entire time he is under water! That’s because air pressure pushes in
all directions!
The reason diver’s don’t die in an un leaking suit is because the air
around their heads and inside their lungs exactly matches the pressure
of the ocean on their lower body. In normal usage, the diving suit
isn’t fully inflated with air. There is just enough air in the upper
chest and around the head to allow the blood and body fluids to
equalize with the ocean pressure on a SLOW descent. Divers with aqua
lungs can go to a 300 foot depth, but can only stay for a short time
because of the need for making a slow assent to avoid getting the
bends. Those using diving suits faced the same problem.
Recompression chambers, or a diving ‘bell’ were available for the
divers, if needed.
The big advantage of the diving suits over aqua lungs is the much
longer time which can be spent at depth—due to the unlimited air
supply being pumped down. Sometimes, if there was an emergency, such
as a sudden storm, it could be necessary to get a diver off the bottom
as quickly as possible. To do that, the pressure in the suit would be
increased to fully inflate the suit. The diver would float to the top
like a cork, and immediately be placed into the recompression
chamber. *** MythBusters didn’t understand that air pressure pushes
in all directions, and that a fully inflated suit would be so STIFF as
to make doing any useful work impossible.
(2.) Mythbusters stated that a person (or “Buster”) dropping 20 feet
experienced close to 12 ‘gs’ hitting an air bag, and 9 ’gs’ hitting
bags of foam rubber. Both of which they claimed were… survivable.
‘Accelerometers’ were used to graph changes in velocity, and the
latter allowed a computer program to determine the… ‘g’ forces.
Unfortunately, those forces were and are being wrongly calculated
using Coriolis’s 1830 kinetic energy equation, KE = 1/2mv^2, which I
have disproved up, down, and sideways! As is the case for Einstein’s
SR equation, Coriolis’s violates the Law of the Conservation of
Energy, as well as a number of other realities.
If a human being weighing 160 pounds experienced 12 ‘gs’, that would
be like placing a 1,920 pound slab of concrete on the person.
Survivable? Probably not. In actuality, the KE increases LINEARLY
with respect to either the time of fall or the velocity, provided the
benchmark velocity is 32.174 feet per second. The simplest way to
approximate the ‘g’ forces is to say: The accelerating fall over 20
feet gets countered by a deceleration over (I estimate) five feet.
Since the deceleration occurs in 1/4th the time and distance, the
correct ‘g’ force in only 4, not 9. If one wishes to confirm this
mathematically, the correct formula for kinetic energy is my own, KE =
a / g (m) + v / 32.174 (m).
MythBusters is too stuck up to perform, on their show, the simple ball
drop experiment (at larger scales, of course) explained below. Like
too many in “science”, they don’t relish being shown to have ever been
wrong. Didn’t they state, recently, that the FORCE needed to break a
duct tape auto barrier was… 100,000 “foot-pounds”? Ha, ha, HA!
Respectfully submitted,
— NoEinstein —
Real name: John A. Armistead
Dropping Einstein Like a Stone
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/989e16c59967db2b?hl=en
jmor...@idirect.com
The leak that causes the damage to a hard-hat diver is not in the
suit; it is in the compressed air plumbing at the surface. For a
diver at say 100 feet depth, the pressure in the suit AND all the way
to the surface, in the air supply plumbing, is about 45 psi gauge. If
this plumbing becomes open to the atmosphere at the surface, then the
pressure throughout, including the diver's helmet, drops to 0 psig,
and squish...
Cwatters
"NoEinstein" <noein...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:3465a0d8-db4e-47ad...@f6g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
> (2.) Mythbusters stated that a person (or “Buster”) dropping 20 feet
>experienced close to 12 ‘gs’ hitting an air bag, and 9 ’gs’ hitting
>bags of foam rubber. Both of which they claimed were… survivable.
They are easily survivable.
I suggest you research the Red Bull Air races. The rules limit how much g
the pilot can pull to 12g. The rule has been broken a few times.
Paul Bonhomme was disqualified for pulling 13g for 0.7 seconds (and >9g for
longer)..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSNi4yeSwn8
Video of Hannes Arch pulling 11.2g..
http://videosift.com/video/Extreme-flying-Red-Bull-Air-Race-pilot-pulls-11-2G
NoEinstein
wrote:
>
Dear jmorr: By my saying... if the suit springs a leak, I wasn't
excluding having the leak occur in the hose to the surface. Thanks
for your comments! — NoEinstein —
>
> - Show quoted text -
NoEinstein
<colin.wattersNOS...@TurnersOakNOSPAM.plus.com> wrote:
>
Dear Cwatters: The SUPPOSED 'gs' being experienced by pilots are all
calculated using the now-disproved (by yours truly) 1830 Coriolis
equation, KE = 1/2mv^2. The actual 'survivable' 'gs' are much lower.
— NoEinstein —
>
> "NoEinstein" <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>
> news:3465a0d8-db4e-47ad...@f6g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
>
> > (2.) Mythbusters stated that a person (or “Buster”) dropping 20 feet
> >experienced close to 12 ‘gs’ hitting an air bag, and 9 ’gs’ hitting
> >bags of foam rubber. Both of which they claimed were… survivable.
>
> They are easily survivable.
>
> I suggest you research the Red Bull Air races. The rules limit how much g
> the pilot can pull to 12g. The rule has been broken a few times.
>
> Paul Bonhomme was disqualified for pulling 13g for 0.7 seconds (and >9g for
>
> Video of Hannes Arch pulling 11.2g..http://videosift.com/video/Extreme-flying-Red-Bull-Air-Race-pilot-pul...
jmor...@idirect.com
> On Jul 18, 11:53 pm, "jmorr...@idirect.com" <jmorr...@idirect.com>
> wrote:
>
> Dear jmorr: By my saying... if the suit springs a leak, I wasn't
> excluding having the leak occur in the hose to the surface. Thanks
> for your comments! — NoEinstein —
>
More specifically, the most dangerous leak occurs in the hose to the
surface AT THE SURFACE.
After all, the air coming down the hose IS leaking out of the suit,
through a vent. But the leak is balanced by the flow of air down the
hose, and the pressure throughout the hose and in the helmet, matches
the water pressure around the diver.
Cut the hose at the suit, and the diver drowns or suffocatesl no
pressure effect.
Cut the hose about 30 feet above the diver, and he'll feel a one
atmosphere squish. For every 30 feet up, another atmosphere, more or
less.
A diver can also get squished by dropping too quickly, say while
working on the sloping side of a sunken ship. If a diver falls 30
feet down, too fast for the air compressor to keep up, he's in one
atmosphere trouble again.
Good luck with the New Kinematics...
Cwatters
On Jul 19, 7:34 am, "Cwatters"
<colin.wattersNOS...@TurnersOakNOSPAM.plus.com> wrote:
>
Dear Cwatters: The SUPPOSED 'gs' being experienced by pilots are all
calculated using the now-disproved (by yours truly) 1830 Coriolis
equation, KE = 1/2mv^2. The actual 'survivable' 'gs' are much lower.
— NoEinstein —
They aren't calculated at all. They are measured.
Androcles
"Cwatters" <colin.wat...@TurnersOakNOSPAM.plus.com> wrote in message
news:0-6dnTDMJ_QS1tjR...@brightview.co.uk...
aetherialistic freak says.
PD
>
> (2.) Mythbusters stated that a person (or “Buster”) dropping 20 feet
> experienced close to 12 ‘gs’ hitting an air bag, and 9 ’gs’ hitting
> bags of foam rubber. Both of which they claimed were… survivable.
> ‘Accelerometers’ were used to graph changes in velocity, and the
> latter allowed a computer program to determine the… ‘g’ forces.
> Unfortunately, those forces were and are being wrongly calculated
> using Coriolis’s 1830 kinetic energy equation, KE = 1/2mv^2, which I
> have disproved up, down, and sideways! As is the case for Einstein’s
> SR equation, Coriolis’s violates the Law of the Conservation of
> Energy, as well as a number of other realities.
>
> If a human being weighing 160 pounds experienced 12 ‘gs’, that would
> be like placing a 1,920 pound slab of concrete on the person.
> Survivable? Probably not. In actuality, the KE increases LINEARLY
> with respect to either the time of fall or the velocity, provided the
> benchmark velocity is 32.174 feet per second. The simplest way to
> approximate the ‘g’ forces is to say: The accelerating fall over 20
> feet gets countered by a deceleration over (I estimate) five feet.
> Since the deceleration occurs in 1/4th the time and distance, the
> correct ‘g’ force in only 4, not 9. If one wishes to confirm this
> mathematically, the correct formula for kinetic energy is my own, KE =
> a / g (m) + v / 32.174 (m).
There's no kinetic energy calculation required. When you experience
"g"s, that is a measure of your acceleration (a negative acceleration
is sometimes called deceleration, but it's an acceleration
nonetheless). If you start at rest when you jump and end at rest when
you land, then there is a simple ratio:
[acceleration]/g = [distance landing pit compresses]/[distance in free
fall].
This ratio is easy to derive from the relation v^2 = v0^2 + 2*a*d.
Thus you are right that if the distance the pit compresses is 1/4th
the distance fallen, then the *average* acceleration on landing is 4
"g"s. There may of course be less acceleration at the point of impact,
and higher acceleration as the pit compresses, which would be the case
for just about any elastic behavior in the pit.
>
> MythBusters is too stuck up to perform, on their show, the simple ball
> drop experiment (at larger scales, of course) explained below. Like
> too many in “science”, they don’t relish being shown to have ever been
> wrong. Didn’t they state, recently, that the FORCE needed to break a
> duct tape auto barrier was… 100,000 “foot-pounds”? Ha, ha, HA!
>
> Respectfully submitted,
>
> — NoEinstein —
>
> Real name: John A. Armistead
>
> Dropping Einstein Like a Stonehttp://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/989e1...
PD
<colin.wattersNOS...@TurnersOakNOSPAM.plus.com> wrote:
> "NoEinstein" <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
By an accelerometer. Which you can make with a protractor and a string
and a fishing weight, or a plastic tube and a rubber band and a
fishing weight.