I don't actually. The page clearly and explicitly states "Ficticious". Granted, reactive centrifugal force does exist, but in the context that this video is applying it, it doesnt. It's simply the water having inertia that causes it to move to the outside of the pump.
No, they were quite clearly referring to reactive centrifugal force in the video. They may not have explicitly stated so, but the physics shown are correct. I believe you are making a rather poor attempt to appear intelligent.
I don't see how you can say I'm trying to "appear intellegent". Going by what is SAID and not what it implied by the video, they didn't clearly diffrentiate between using reactive and 'non-reactive' centrifugal force. If you were designing something and you said you would use rivets, do you expect someone to know the type of rivet? Is it a pop rivet? If I'm wrong, please show me how instead of being petty and childish in saying im trying to appear intellegent.
Arguing passionately for what is essentially a moot point is why you seem to be trying to appear intelligent. They said "centrifugal force", which doesn't specify what exactly they mean, but since their device works they must be referring to something quite real. And since this video is concerned with presenting an idea and not with presenting a technical overview, it doesn't need to be that precise. To insist that it must fit your expectations of technical perfection is extremely childish.
Again, you seem to be conflating the issue. I stated that centrifugal force does not exist, I don't recall asking you to reply, so frankly, that doesn't afford any reply from you. An argument requires two people so if I'm "arguing passionately" then so are you. And actually they mentioned "centrifugal pump" and when watching this video for the first time, centrifugal was 'pseudo-physics' to me. Yes the device works but that does not justify its principle.
P.S. You're probably right in saying the physics in this video is correct but there is nothing incorrect with my initial statement that centrifugal force doesn't exist. You may be right in calling the following "arguing passionately" but I'm not bothered, you just seem to be twisting the video's context with implications to herald an agrument. Copernicus' model of the Universe 'worked' but his physics was incorrect. Hey I bet they didn't expect to get this many comments on their video though.
This has been flagged as spam show
love it! thanks! would you consider to upload it on water-wheel[dot]net
a new online platform focusing on water as a theme and metaphor. Launch on 22 August 2011, but uploading is already possible! cheers
suzonfuks 8 months ago
if you distill seawater it will remove salt
tippo747 2 years ago
how many gallons per hour can you take out of the well?
saacbe 3 years ago
If wikipedia is true, then they should call a centrifugal clutch a inertia clutch, right?
toddoroni 4 years ago
You are somebody who understands physics my friend. Inertia would be the correct term
eakinlade 4 years ago
I saw this on an episode of Gilligan's Island.
toddoroni 4 years ago
Centrifugal force does not exist
eakinlade 4 years ago
yes it does
olsonr 4 years ago
No it doesn't. Check en(dot)wikipedia(dot) org/wiki/Centrifugal_force. It is a "Ficticious" force.
eakinlade 4 years ago
Um, you need to reread that page.
Avalikia 4 years ago
I don't actually. The page clearly and explicitly states "Ficticious". Granted, reactive centrifugal force does exist, but in the context that this video is applying it, it doesnt. It's simply the water having inertia that causes it to move to the outside of the pump.
eakinlade 4 years ago
No, they were quite clearly referring to reactive centrifugal force in the video. They may not have explicitly stated so, but the physics shown are correct. I believe you are making a rather poor attempt to appear intelligent.
Avalikia 4 years ago
I don't see how you can say I'm trying to "appear intellegent". Going by what is SAID and not what it implied by the video, they didn't clearly diffrentiate between using reactive and 'non-reactive' centrifugal force. If you were designing something and you said you would use rivets, do you expect someone to know the type of rivet? Is it a pop rivet? If I'm wrong, please show me how instead of being petty and childish in saying im trying to appear intellegent.
eakinlade 4 years ago
Arguing passionately for what is essentially a moot point is why you seem to be trying to appear intelligent. They said "centrifugal force", which doesn't specify what exactly they mean, but since their device works they must be referring to something quite real. And since this video is concerned with presenting an idea and not with presenting a technical overview, it doesn't need to be that precise. To insist that it must fit your expectations of technical perfection is extremely childish.
Avalikia 4 years ago
Again, you seem to be conflating the issue. I stated that centrifugal force does not exist, I don't recall asking you to reply, so frankly, that doesn't afford any reply from you. An argument requires two people so if I'm "arguing passionately" then so are you. And actually they mentioned "centrifugal pump" and when watching this video for the first time, centrifugal was 'pseudo-physics' to me. Yes the device works but that does not justify its principle.
eakinlade 4 years ago
P.S. You're probably right in saying the physics in this video is correct but there is nothing incorrect with my initial statement that centrifugal force doesn't exist. You may be right in calling the following "arguing passionately" but I'm not bothered, you just seem to be twisting the video's context with implications to herald an agrument. Copernicus' model of the Universe 'worked' but his physics was incorrect. Hey I bet they didn't expect to get this many comments on their video though.
eakinlade 4 years ago
Nice style. you packed a lot of info in there. Now I know what an impeller does.
fossilfool 4 years ago
Great invention.....what sets this a part from the rest is the cost efficient tools you have used to product this energy.
Excellent job.....5 stars!
ktamerisa 4 years ago