Re: Titor\'s Collapse Still Nowhere In Sight
That's all you've got? Since you obviously have a fetish for trying to prove me wrong, what, pray tell, do you think you are proving me wrong on with this link? I was merely asking YOU to admit YOU were wrong about saying
jmpet: His only problem was composities weren't yet invented.
And oh yes... you were wrong about that, but I know you won't admit it. And while I am not as obsessed as you with painting me wrong, I would even claim that this statement of yours is certainly debatable on several points:
jmpet: DaVinci was the original aerospace engineer.
That really depends on how one classifies what it is to be an aerospace engineer. While DaVinci was certainly a genius, and while he did do some of the first scientific inquiry into flight, he most certainly did not define the science of aerodynamics which could be put into practice reliably, and with continuous powered flight. He needed engines and Bernoulli's discovery in order to do that... and the Wrights had the benefit of these. So you see, once again, you are trying to prove me wrong on something I didn't say. I did NOT claim anywhere that DaVinci wasn't a genius.
And now how about you take a look at the words I have bolded in the quote you supplied:
"Fascinated by the phenomenon of flight, Leonardo produced detailed studies of the flight of birds, and plans for several flying machines, including a helicopter powered by four men ( which would not have worked since the body of the craft would have rotated) and a light hang-glider which could have flown. On January 3, 1496 he unsuccessfully tested a flying machine he had constructed. PBS aired a special about the building and testing of a glider based on Da Vinci's design. The glider was a resounding success."
And just to make sure you understand that last part: The PBS special was not about a DaVinci success... it was about people from our day, building a glider "based on" DaVinci's design. I saw that same special, and the biggest thing that DaVinci "missed" related to lateral damping. The folks in the PBS special found out they had to make a larger vertical fin than what DaVinci had specified, this to provide natural aerodynamic damping of the glider's spiral response.
So yes...I AM an expert in aerodynamics. And as a person who has worked over 20 years in this business, I would say that while DaVinci was certainly a genius scientist, he clearly did not quantify the parameters of flight in such a way that you typically think of engineering putting science into practice. And that is why the Wright Brothers earned this distinction.
But back to you and your obsession... still don't feel you have to admit you were wrong on any of the above?
I have already said "I am willing to admit I am wrong and in that case I will admit it", I have yet to see anything along those lines from you.
It's quite possible that this is only because you are closing your eyes... unwilling to admit when you were wrong.
But I'll keep playing the game as long as you want to play it. How about a new twist to the game? How about you try falsifying, or proving wrong, some of my maths that you asked for? You seem to want to nitpick on things (like your new signature line, and how it is taken out of the context it was meant to be in). Why not go for greatness and prove that my theoretical approach to Massive SpaceTime is scientifically incorrect? That would be much more helpful to the discussion than you pointless sniping! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
RMT