(This video uses captions). Cycloid-like shapes are put together to create a shape that at a specific velocity and fixed pitch would minimize the time-path of air forced to travel over a moving object, possibly serving as a profile for a fixed pitch helicopter rotor blade.
@AForkSpoon Perhaps the key is in the difference between theoretical and statistical probability. Statistically, the house wins at blackjack, though, theoretically, the player can win. A gang from MIT, based on theory, against all statistical probability, made loads of money off of the casinos. Similarly, you are basing yourself on the statistical probability of this idea beating those in use, whereas alI the ideas in this channel of Thought Experiments are all about brainstorming theory.
@AForkSpoon The question to you is, how do you know when you're talking to the first one who came up with a new idea, you know, before it was successfully brought to fruition? How do you decide on whether this idea is about something worth calling a buddy at Boeing? Don't you even look into whether the science on which it is based is sound? How do *you* decide the probability, without relinquishing your thinking to the market? Yours seems like a very superficial probability assessment.
@adanieltorres i'm not saying its a bad thought at all, i'm not saying that coming up with ideas is bad in any way. ALL i am saying is that "unless it is already in use" then it probably does not work. If it is in use then it works and is not a new idea. i never said that only good thoughts are new. the only thing i am trying to say is that IT PROBABLY DOES NOT WORK "unless it is already in use".
Stealth fighters and bombers seem to have profile similarities with this idea. But aside from whether someone else has thought of it or not before me, why would you wish to deter anyone from trying to come up with new ideas? Instead, discuss the concepts on which the idea is based. Do you see a flaw? After all it's a Thought Experiments channel. Or perhaps I should stop thinking, altogether, because someone else probably already had the same thoughts... :P
@AForkSpoon Your implicit message is regarding the futility of my attempts at coming up with an optimal design, given my competition (i.e., countless researchers and dollars). Let's suppose one of those researchers thought of this. The idea would be put forth before the others and it would get tested if they thought it had any merit. The researcher would not simply say, "if this worked, someone else would already have done it." I, unlike you, have seen this idea implemented.
@adanieltorres i said it probably wouldnt, unless it is an existing design in use right now. Airlines pay big bucks for reasearch and your idea has probably already been tested by someone working for boeing. Ideas are great, but theres this other idea that it probably does not work or is is not a new idea.
@AForkSpoon I'm glad that you think it seems that it would be great. Note that airplanes require changing the shape of the wing several times from take-off to landing, so this idea does not apply, unless we come up with a way to change its shape on the fly. This idea is for a fixed pitch and rpm, to optimize the shape at a specific angle of attack, and prevent air curling back behind it. Aside from that, are you suggesting we stop having ideas?! Sorry, at least for me, no can do.
Wouldnt we already see this in planes and stuff if its so great? I don't see it and i'm sure that millions of dollars of investments find better results than a single THEORETICAL idea. I doubt this works, unless it is already being used.
@JesusAlbertoPinto My next video in the series of this wing profile, is Rotor Blade Shape idea. Since the idea is for a fixed speed rotation, each blade would be shaped like a pizza slice to take into account that the outer portions travel faster. The profile, then, would have to be optimized for each curved crossection over which the air would travel. More detail in the upcoming video...
@JesusAlbertoPinto In fact, the Brachistochrone is only for a single particle free falling from standstill. I'm aware of all three points. I wrote "Cycloid-like shape" and in the video I pointed out that a cycloid would no longer be optimal for sideways plowing. What I allude to is the possible existence of an analogous profile for fixed speed, of fixed pitch, moving through a specific air medium that someone already deeper into fluid mechanics principles would help discover. hint, hint. :)
@AForkSpoon Perhaps the key is in the difference between theoretical and statistical probability. Statistically, the house wins at blackjack, though, theoretically, the player can win. A gang from MIT, based on theory, against all statistical probability, made loads of money off of the casinos. Similarly, you are basing yourself on the statistical probability of this idea beating those in use, whereas alI the ideas in this channel of Thought Experiments are all about brainstorming theory.
adanieltorres 5 months ago
@AForkSpoon The question to you is, how do you know when you're talking to the first one who came up with a new idea, you know, before it was successfully brought to fruition? How do you decide on whether this idea is about something worth calling a buddy at Boeing? Don't you even look into whether the science on which it is based is sound? How do *you* decide the probability, without relinquishing your thinking to the market? Yours seems like a very superficial probability assessment.
adanieltorres 5 months ago
@adanieltorres i'm not saying its a bad thought at all, i'm not saying that coming up with ideas is bad in any way. ALL i am saying is that "unless it is already in use" then it probably does not work. If it is in use then it works and is not a new idea. i never said that only good thoughts are new. the only thing i am trying to say is that IT PROBABLY DOES NOT WORK "unless it is already in use".
AForkSpoon 5 months ago
@AForkSpoon ...
Stealth fighters and bombers seem to have profile similarities with this idea. But aside from whether someone else has thought of it or not before me, why would you wish to deter anyone from trying to come up with new ideas? Instead, discuss the concepts on which the idea is based. Do you see a flaw? After all it's a Thought Experiments channel. Or perhaps I should stop thinking, altogether, because someone else probably already had the same thoughts... :P
adanieltorres 5 months ago
@AForkSpoon Your implicit message is regarding the futility of my attempts at coming up with an optimal design, given my competition (i.e., countless researchers and dollars). Let's suppose one of those researchers thought of this. The idea would be put forth before the others and it would get tested if they thought it had any merit. The researcher would not simply say, "if this worked, someone else would already have done it." I, unlike you, have seen this idea implemented.
...
adanieltorres 5 months ago
@adanieltorres i said it probably wouldnt, unless it is an existing design in use right now. Airlines pay big bucks for reasearch and your idea has probably already been tested by someone working for boeing. Ideas are great, but theres this other idea that it probably does not work or is is not a new idea.
AForkSpoon 5 months ago
@AForkSpoon I'm glad that you think it seems that it would be great. Note that airplanes require changing the shape of the wing several times from take-off to landing, so this idea does not apply, unless we come up with a way to change its shape on the fly. This idea is for a fixed pitch and rpm, to optimize the shape at a specific angle of attack, and prevent air curling back behind it. Aside from that, are you suggesting we stop having ideas?! Sorry, at least for me, no can do.
adanieltorres 5 months ago
Wouldnt we already see this in planes and stuff if its so great? I don't see it and i'm sure that millions of dollars of investments find better results than a single THEORETICAL idea. I doubt this works, unless it is already being used.
AForkSpoon 5 months ago
@JesusAlbertoPinto My next video in the series of this wing profile, is Rotor Blade Shape idea. Since the idea is for a fixed speed rotation, each blade would be shaped like a pizza slice to take into account that the outer portions travel faster. The profile, then, would have to be optimized for each curved crossection over which the air would travel. More detail in the upcoming video...
adanieltorres 11 months ago
@JesusAlbertoPinto In fact, the Brachistochrone is only for a single particle free falling from standstill. I'm aware of all three points. I wrote "Cycloid-like shape" and in the video I pointed out that a cycloid would no longer be optimal for sideways plowing. What I allude to is the possible existence of an analogous profile for fixed speed, of fixed pitch, moving through a specific air medium that someone already deeper into fluid mechanics principles would help discover. hint, hint. :)
adanieltorres 11 months ago