Nick notes that there's something funny if an array reduces effective wind for a peleton of sweaty bicyclistes, but increases it for a bunch of spinning turbines. And he's dead right! And these are legitimate, rational questions that an intelligent layman should ask. The answer is that the science writer is propagating BS, as is often the case. Did anyone hear it? I have been in contact with the author, my friend, John Dabiri, who told me they weren't ready to release their paper yet but he'd send me ASAP! When I study it, I'll brief Friamers on the content, and its validity. I dunno! And I'd like to read. Dick Feynman used to say unofficially that he never read papers, but if you told him the title and the author, he would tell you what it was about and why it was wrong!! A good approach for genius , but beyond me! ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org |
Thank you, Peter. You are very kind to take the question seriously.
Asking a question is like making a mess. Doing it is alot easier than undoing it.
I am particularly puzzled by the manner in which "incompressibility" would seem to disturb the ways in which people talk about meteorology. Are we dealing with ways of speaking that are sufficient for some domains and not for others?
And, as you all know, I fascinated by the manner in which scientists use the same words in such different ways as to disturb the flow of information between them.
I await your report with enthusiasm.
Nick
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology,
Clark University ([hidden email])
http://www.cusf.org [City University of Santa Fe]
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org |
In reply to this post by plissaman
[hidden email] wrote:
> I was concerned at his naive statement that the power increases > because the rotational speed increases. Wouldn't it be remarkable for these Caltech guys (ok, trained in aerodynamics but researching biopropulsion) to not hold torque fixed in their models? Marcus ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org |
In reply to this post by plissaman
[hidden email] wrote:
> > When I study it, I'll brief Friamers on the content, and its validity. > Looking forward to that! Thanks, Marcus ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |