PDA

View Full Version : Your Aerodynamics are all Screwed Up!


XP3Scorpion
Feb13-04, 04:10 PM
Your Aerodynamics are all Screwed Up!

Rule #1) Never should the small end of an object that is intended to travel through a viscous (sticky & elastic) environment e.g. air, water, electromagnetic-spectrum etc... precede the larger end, to do so places the moving object in opposition to natures cyclonic properties i.e. any object that has a smaller point in the front and a larger tail section in the rear is 180-degrees out of phase with the environment.

Comprehend and Copy Nature!

Anatomically speaking nature is female, and as such certain rules do apply.

Note: When a bird lays an "egg" the large end always proceeds the smaller end, otherwise the vaginal orifice can not "squeeze" the egg and expel it from the birthing canal. Said squeezing translates into either constructive or destructive force depending on the direction of the geometrical structure i.e. the shape of the object traveling through the environment, large end preceding the smaller tapered end thereby allowing the air, water, electromagnetic properties inherent within the environment to squeeze the object from an anterior location e.g. from back to front and not the other way round, which would initialize an antagonistic force against force, nature ultimately being the larger force.

Spoilers

In general the use of a spoiler on a car was intended to squeeze a jet of air from in-between the under surface of the wing and that of the car body, whereby practice drag in the form of eddy/vortices is pushed further away downstream form the rear of the car so as not to be allowed to pull backwards and thus detract from the overall froward travel of the vehicle. It should be borne of mind thou that is a brut force upon brut force measure, and as such goes against complementary energy transference technology. Remember parasitic drag is induced via the forward motion of the vehicle through the air. Therefor geometrical shapes plays a major role on the selective placement of the "squeeze-energy" either beneficially or antagonistically depending upon the shape of the craft.

This is where the "coke-bottle" shape of a supersonic platform and the area rule design come into play...

Oh! You think I'm wrong?

Then please explain to me how I managed to obtain 3-times my normal mileage driving in excess of 70-mph and how I managed to obtain between 100-and-590-mpg driving a sustained speed of 65-mph, applying the same principles cited above. http://quantumgravitics.tripod.com/

chroot
Feb13-04, 04:19 PM
Birds don't have vaginas.

- Warren

russ_watters
Feb13-04, 04:47 PM
Unless I'm misunderstanding you, what you're saying in the first part doesn't sound a whole lot different from what we already know: a teardrop shape is the most efficient subsonic shape. The second part about spoilers though is wrong: spoilers exist to "spoil" lift, not reduce drag.

Your claims about that van getting 100mpg, however are absolutely absurd.

chroot
Feb13-04, 04:50 PM
Originally posted by russ_watters
Your claims about that van getting 100mpg, however are absolutely absurd.
Oh come on man.. check it out!

http://quantumgravitics.tripod.com//sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/riwfueltest.jpg

If that ain't the solution to the world's energy problems, I don't know what is!

- Warren

Cliff_J
Feb13-04, 04:50 PM
Originally posted by XP3Scorpion
Then please explain to me how I managed to obtain 3-times my normal mileage driving in excess of 70-mph and how I managed to obtain between 100-and-590-mpg driving a sustained speed of 65-mph

You filled up the tank with cold fuel from an underground tank, drove 20 miles and refilled it. Then went 59 miles, refilled, and have outrageoud MPG claims.

Ever just put your lawnmower's gas can in the sun after you've filled the mower and then to refill again? Ever had vapor lock after topping off you tank?

Cliff

chroot
Feb13-04, 04:55 PM
Originally posted by Cliff_J
You filled up the tank with cold fuel from an underground tank, drove 20 miles and refilled it. Then went 59 miles, refilled, and have outrageoud MPG claims.
Come on now, Cliff. This site isn't about that science baloney.

- Warren

enigma
Feb13-04, 06:14 PM
Oh wow...

my first "move to TD" thread ever!

I feel so special.

*pushes button*

krab
Feb14-04, 01:48 AM
Originally posted by russ_watters
...Your claims about that van getting 100mpg, however are absolutely absurd.
But look! I've found an error. He says 59 miles @ 0.1 tenths of a gallon = 590-mpg! 0.1 tenths of a gallon is actually 0.01 gallon. So the actual fuel consumption rate is 5900 mpg! Wow. Now we're talking.

Andy
Feb17-04, 03:01 PM
Where can I buy one?

XP3Scorpion
May13-04, 03:02 PM
Hello! :biggrin:

Everybody looks like Ill be attending the conference hosted by TeslaTech and the Institute of New Energy.

Steven R. Elswick of Extraordinary Technology Magazine has invited me to attend their prestigious technology conference. I will discus Vortex Mechanics Free Energy and the RIW of course Ill bring the QEG-circuit too working or not.

2004 Extraordinary Technology Conference :shy:

--- Conference Session 6 --- Alternative Energy Technology 2:30pm: Robert A. Patterson

http://www.teslatech.info/ttevents/2004conf/prgframe.htm Program Menu


http://www.teslatech.info/ttevents/2004conf/program11.pdf PDF article

Thank You

Robert A. Patterson
Engineering Specialist
http://quantumgravitics.tripod.com/