Recent content by FactChecker

There are other things going on. Please try to understand Bernoulli's equation, which gives the trade-off between pressure and velocity.

Yes. So that is where the velocity can come from -- decreased pressure. This just means that the random directional movement of atoms causing pressure can be somewhat redirected to the forward direction of motion, causing an increase of airflow velocity and a decrease in pressure.

Sorry. I stand corrected. I was thinking about incompressible fluid flow. Thanks.

I disagree. IMO, most of the explanations compare a "stationary" light clock to a "moving" light clock. The experimental result that the light in the two clocks travel the same speed, measured in each clocks IRF, leads to the results of time dilation and distance shrinking. The confusion...

Good point. I think that is the unexpressed question of the OP. The diagrams that @renormalize included in post #27 seems to indicate that the velocity can be higher than the freestream velocity. The streamlines appear closer together at the leading corners of the obstruction than they were in...

That is a consequence in certain situations of Bernoulli's equation. It is not Bernoulli's equation.

You should describe ##D## for us, I assume it is a subset of the natural numbers. With that in mind: Since ##f## is an injection on a subset of ##D##, each ##r_n \lt \sum_{i=1}^\infty 2^{-i} = 1##. Since the sequence, ##r_n## is increasing and bounded, it converges.

It does seem clear from the diagrams @renormalize put in post #27, that the leading corners squeeze the streamlines together. That indicates an increased velocity.

"artificial distinction"? What??!! Riding fast in a car, can't you tell tell the difference between smoothly going straight and going around a curve? IMHO, there is something strangely wrong about this entire thread.

IMO, it is false that the Michelson-Morley experiments were artificially designed to give the result supporting the postulate of a constant speed of light, Neither Michelson nor Morley expected the results that they got.

Everything we believe boils down to acceptance of a set of postulates. In reality this may all be a dream of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. (Sorry. I am a Pastafarian and could not resist.)

I would state this a little differently. Small changes in the host's behavior completely change our best guess of the outcome. In a gambler's parlance, the fact that the host avoided opening one door is a "tell". It is the "filtering" behavior of the host to avoid opening one door which changes...

An inertial frame of reference is a mathematical construct to describe an undeniable physical fact. Anyone can feel acceleration. Acceleration exists and affects physical objects, whether there is a human to witness it or not. Inventing a mathematical reference frame to describe the existence or...

You're right, a postulate isn't necessarily a fact. This postulate was a way to explain experimental results. It is the simplest (naive?) explanation of the measured result that light speed is always measured to be c in an inertial reference frame, regardless of the velocity of that frame. This...

If a stream with circular symmetry hits a wall, the center of the stream will have a zero velocity at the wall. The symmetry allows no lateral velocity there. That is at a single point on the wall. Other points will have lateral/radial velocity. IMO, a wide freestream airflow would have lateral...