Mythbusters

  • Thread starter Hercules Smackbottom
  • Start date
H

Hercules Smackbottom

Guest
Another good one last night. They did ship-sinking experiments,
and several versions of an exploding trombone.
SBS television in Australia is now referring to Mythbusters
as their "cult phonomenon."
 
Hercules Smackbottom wrote:
Another good one last night. They did ship-sinking experiments
Click to expand...
Don't know what was good about that one. There's no way a boat
that size could create a significant down-current. You need to
have many metres of length above the water at the point where
the ship passes neutral bouyancy. That gives it time to accelerate
downwards to a significant speed before going completely under.
Totally irrelevant experiment, and the point is unproven - as
with most of their stunts.
 
"Clifford Heath" <no@spam.please> wrote in message
news:1112671420.470d2bab4b8f888d356e24a7291c1c79@teranews...
Hercules Smackbottom wrote:
Another good one last night. They did ship-sinking experiments

snip, snip
Totally irrelevant experiment, and the point is unproven - as
with most of their stunts.
Click to expand...
Which may very well explain PA's liking for the program. After all, making
wild accusations and unproven statements is his speciality.
 
Clifford Heath wrote:
Hercules Smackbottom wrote:
Another good one last night. They did ship-sinking experiments

Don't know what was good about that one. There's no way a boat
that size could create a significant down-current. You need to
have many metres of length above the water at the point where
the ship passes neutral bouyancy. That gives it time to accelerate
downwards to a significant speed before going completely under.
Totally irrelevant experiment, and the point is unproven - as
with most of their stunts.
Click to expand...
You miss the whole point of the show, it's called FUN.

I liked the fish maze one too.

Dave :)
 
David L. Jones wrote:
You miss the whole point of the show, it's called FUN.
Click to expand...
Hey, don't get me wrong - I enjoy it too. But it baffles
me that people can be so ignorant as to classify it as a
science show.
 
Clifford Heath wrote:
David L. Jones wrote:
You miss the whole point of the show, it's called FUN.

Hey, don't get me wrong - I enjoy it too. But it baffles
me that people can be so ignorant as to classify it as a
science show.
Click to expand...
It's "Popular Science"

Dave :)
 
"Clifford Heath" = a monstrous, bloody hypocrite
David L. Jones wrote:
You miss the whole point of the show, it's called FUN.

Hey, don't get me wrong - I enjoy it too. But it baffles
me that people can be so ignorant as to classify it as a
science show.
Click to expand...

** On the topic of why two speakers need a box of double volume ( for the
same bass response ) the following was posted on aus.hi-fi two days ago;

PA:

" ** Stiffness and mass determine resonant frequency.
The stiffness comes from the trapped air volume AND
the area of the piston - ie cone. "

CH's reply:

" Granted - but only half the cone motion is required to move the
same amount of air. Half the motion means you only get the same
SPL acting against the same cone area (for each cone). But less
energy required to reverse the cone's motion (being a shorter
stroke) means a faster oscillation, so it makes sense that the
frequency would be higher. "



The above ass has zero grasp of science SO he simply cannot understand what
is being presented on the Mythbusters show.

But he is also a colossal fool and thinks he does.




............. Phil
 
Phil Allison wrote:

His usual tripe. Just ignore him folk. He's just peeved
because twice, before two different admiring audiences,
he's proved his inability to provide a simple answer to
a simple question - even when he clearly knows the answer.
You don't need to show off, Phil - people here already
know what you're like without any further demonstration.
 
"Clifford Heath" = an unspeakable arsehole
Phil Allison wrote:
Click to expand...
** On the topic of why two speakers need a box of double volume ( for the
same bass response ) the following was posted on aus.hi-fi two days ago;

PA:

" ** Stiffness and mass determine resonant frequency.
The stiffness comes from the trapped air volume AND
the area of the piston - ie cone. "

CH's reply:

" Granted - but only half the cone motion is required to move the
same amount of air. Half the motion means you only get the same
SPL acting against the same cone area (for each cone). But less
energy required to reverse the cone's motion (being a shorter
stroke) means a faster oscillation, so it makes sense that the
frequency would be higher. "


The above ass has zero grasp of science SO he simply cannot understand what
is being presented on the Mythbusters show.

But he is also a colossal fool and thinks he does.




............ Phil
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top