Stick rotation?

[mail man]

Guess not at home either?

Damn, I can't even spell Damn correctly. I have to recalibrate my internal spellcheck...how do I do this, should hitting my head on the wall be good enough?

Keith

[-nick-]

Damn, I can't even spell Damn correctly. I have to recalibrate my internal spellcheck...how do I do this, should hitting my head on the wall be good enough?

Keith

No when that happened to me I had to jump off AT LEAST a 5 story building.

[mail man]

but, were you wearing sneakers or boots? If you had your boots on, a 3 story one would have done...so I'm told

[-nick-]

but, were you wearing sneakers or boots? If you had your boots on, a 3 story one would have done...so I'm told

Oh damnit see I knew I should've left the boots on, it's just the sneakers had a cool little air pocket in the bottom so I thought that might make a difference.

[ggiese]

No when that happened to me I had to jump off AT LEAST a 5 story building.

Ok - what's with the threadjack!

We're discussing rotating, not building jumping. Angular momentum - not linear momentum...

[ashauler]

Ok - what's with the threadjack!

We're discussing rotating, not building jumping. Angular momentum - not linear momentum...

Well, hell George, throw the young 'uns a bone and give them the real skinny on stick rotation indicators, methods, and equipment. I'm sure you can see from the posts in this thread it is sorely needed.

I would pass it on, but everyone knows I'm not as generous as you are, and besides, I use the ggiesefoolproofevenhumiditymethod and the patent hasn't expired yet. I don't need you suing me. Again.


geesh i'm bored

[ggiese]

Well, hell George, throw the young 'uns a bone and give them the real skinny on stick rotation indicators, methods, and equipment. I'm sure you can see from the posts in this thread it is sorely needed.

I would pass it on, but everyone knows I'm not as generous as you are, and besides, I use the ggiesefoolproofevenhumiditymethod and the patent hasn't expired yet. I don't need you suing me. Again.


geesh i'm bored

What's with you outing me! That was supposed to be a super board secret. No one gets the info without payin' their dues...

I'll be more than happy to kick 'em in the right direction, though...

[ashauler]

What's with you outing me! That was supposed to be a super board secret. No one gets the info without payin' their dues...

I'll be more than happy to kick 'em in the right direction, though...

Um, uh, ah, oooops. Crap, does that void my warranty?

[mail man]

one questions on the rotating.
Does the rotational force smooth out the edges on the box pressed sticks?



All this talk of rotation is making me sick.

[ndv21]

My wife mentioned something to me the other day about "rotating sticks". I wonder if this is what she meant by it....hmmmm

[ggiese]

one questions on the rotating.
Does the rotational force smooth out the edges on the box pressed sticks?



All this talk of rotation is making me sick.

Why would you ask such a rhetorical question? Are you trying to stir things up???

[nhcigarfan]

Rock tumbler. I just spit in it every once and a while to keep everything moist.

[MarineOne]

Ok - what's with the threadjack!

We're discussing rotating, not building jumping. Angular momentum - not linear momentum...

Well if your angle is greater than zero but less than one, then angular momentum and linear momentum could become the same thing.


Kris

[ggiese]

Well if your angle is greater than zero but less than one, then angular momentum and linear momentum could become the same thing.


Kris

Ooohh... I dunno Kris. A popular misconception.

I know it's rhetorical, but formally the angular momentum of a point object is defined as the cross product of the object's position vector (a measure of an object's resistance to changes in its rotation rate) and the linear momentum vector. By that definition, angular momentum cannot possibly be the same as linear momentum.

[mail man]

Holy shit, you guys are making my head hurt

[ggiese]

Holy shit, you guys are making my head hurt

Trust me - mine hurt plenty when they packed it with that stuff.

[MarineOne]

Oh, now THIS will make your head really thump.

Ooohh... I dunno Kris. A popular misconception.

I know it's rhetorical, but formally the angular momentum of a point object is defined as the cross product of the object's position vector (a measure of an object's resistance to changes in its rotation rate) and the linear momentum vector. By that definition, angular momentum cannot possibly be the same as linear momentum.

Ah yes, I can see that. However there will be both a slowing of momentum from friction and curvature of the linear path due to gravity.

For example, a projectile (arrows, bullets, artillery shells, etc.) will eventually slow down from atmospheric friction which allows gravity to alter the projectiles course. This arguement can also be used for light, since light waves can be altered by gravity (red shift) and be effected by interstellar dust or other celestial bodies that the light would have to pass through.

[ggiese]

Oh, now THIS will make your head really thump.



Ah yes, I can see that. However there will be both a slowing of momentum from friction and curvature of the linear path due to gravity.

For example, a projectile (arrows, bullets, artillery shells, etc.) will eventually slow down from atmospheric friction which allows gravity to alter the projectiles course. This arguement can also be used for light, since light waves can be altered by gravity (red shift) and be effected by interstellar dust or other celestial bodies that the light would have to pass through.

Ahh... The ol' "throwing a projectile" argument. Clever...

Isn't the linear trajectory vector of the object not expressed in two directions? One force vector represented by the forward trajectory of the object, as well as the gravity force vector acting on the object's forward path? m x a = foward trajectory, m x a = force due to gravity ...each separate and distnct, and both linear vectors? ...at least that is conventional thinking.

Or - are they both truly linear vectors? After all - where does gravity come from? So could the vector representing the force due to gravity actually be a representation of an angular force (i.e. tangential acceleration) - typically expressed as a constant value (9.8 m/sec/sec) even though it's truly not constant.

In Quantum Mechanics (which is where the scientific community studies gravitational forces) states through the Heisenberg uncertainty principle that it is not possible for the six term, 2-form Noether charge to be measured simultaneously with arbitrary precision. Therefore, there are limits to what can be known or measured about a particle's angular momentum. It turns out that the best that one can do is to simultaneously measure both the angular momentum vector's magnitude and its component along one axis.

So - I think you'll agree - it is is capricious to think that an angular component becomes linear.

[Shelby07]

Oh, now THIS will make your head really thump.



Ah yes, I can see that. However there will be both a slowing of momentum from friction and curvature of the linear path due to gravity.

For example, a projectile (arrows, bullets, artillery shells, etc.) will eventually slow down from atmospheric friction which allows gravity to alter the projectiles course. This arguement can also be used for light, since light waves can be altered by gravity (red shift) and be effected by interstellar dust or other celestial bodies that the light would have to pass through.

How does cellophane affect the friction factor?