Re: Not trying to 'dig-up' the Bernoulli versus Newton debate :0)




"T o d d P a t t i s t" <tpattist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:eta1v19sp5jecj6kjk2nf5f2m4rtebs636@xxxxxxxxxx
"Cecil Chapman" <bayareapilot@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I'm with you on this one... I've long believed that lift has a LOT more of
Newton in it than Bernoulli.

This is roughly equivalent to saying that lift has a lot
more force in it than conservation of energy. It's clearly
got both "in it."

If you think that by saying "Newton" you can think of air
molecules just bouncing off the bottom of an angled wing,
then you think wrong. If you think "Newton" means an
opposite reaction to air being forced down, then you're
right, but then you have to figure out *why* the air is
being forced down, and Bernoulli's conservation of energy
law for fluid flow helps with that more than the mistaken
Newtonian idea above.
--

IMHO Todd has made significant contributions to the cyclic BvsN discussions
here. He is consistent in steering the discussion to the concept of
"conservation of energy". He has helped me in understanding this (thank you
Todd) and I would suggest others do a Google groups search on author to read
many previous similar excellent responses (some long some short) from him.
If these prior responses were combined and edited, I am sure that he could
just repost this stock answer whenever this question reappears.

Most pilots think only in terms of pressure differences acting directly on
the wing and neglect to consider that they also contribute to "accelerating
a mass of air downward".

Happy landings,



.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: Is Einsteins Principle of Equivalence true?
    ... >> no Torque present and then you can claim conservation violation. ... In the strictest sense, Newton only dealt with neutral objects, i.e. ... The non-conservation of Newtonian energy and angular ... >> isolated systems, except if you can prove that. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Is Einsteins Principle of Equivalence true?
    ... >> no Torque present and then you can claim conservation violation. ... In the strictest sense, Newton only dealt with neutral objects, i.e. ... The non-conservation of Newtonian energy and angular ... >> isolated systems, except if you can prove that. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: PBS Einsteins big idea, E=m=?ISO-8859-1?B?sA==?=c^2
    ... >> The other one is related more closely to classical mechanics. ... >> that Newton did not understand the conservation of energy. ... What I find difficult to comprehend is that Newton did not know that if you ...
    (sci.optics)
  • Re: PBS Einsteins big idea, E=m°c^2
    ... > The other one is related more closely to classical mechanics. ... > that Newton did not understand the conservation of energy. ... The concept of energy and its conservation seems self evident today, ...
    (sci.optics)
  • Re: Proof for E=mc2
    ... >> energy, given up as kinetic. ... The cork bobbing on water or the mass on ... >> the two was not something Newton did, that is agreed, but Newton's ... >> car do less damage to the moving car than the moving car ...
    (sci.physics)