/sci/ - Science & Math

I can fit a potato in my mouth

Don't California residents get full tuition in state? If you're a California resident, getting a full ride to Berkeley amounts to just living in California, doesn't it?

I once came enough to fill a rubber glove.

I once looked at a black guy funny.

I once 93 MB or .rar files.

>>4861258
I'm Canadian-American, dual citizenship pleb - I live in Canada

>>4861263
What are you going to major in?

I once didn't shit for a week.

>>4861267
Womens Studies.

>>4861267
physics

Well I'm god. Get on my level.

>>4861272
I genuinely loled.

OP, why are you posting this? It's not relevant to anything /sci/ go to /soc/.

>Not aspergers
>Not teaching yourself abstract algebra by 12th
>Mensa; > I seriously hope...
>Berkeley; >2012
>Bragging about physical traits

OP confirmed for butt devastated.

>be 16
>190 cm (yurofag)
>state champion in rowing (single sculls)
>state champion in physics (calculating charge on electrons-Millikans modified experiment)
>you are a cunt my friend and you havent accomplished anything

>>4861278
I'm King of the Gods. On bended knee you faggots.

>>4861273

I bet you can't even do a simple physics problem.

A helicopter is hovering in flight. The force applied to the helicopter by it's blades is exactly equal to that of gravity. What happens to the helicopter?

>>4861246
nothing, please kill me ;_;

I once popped a half dozen sleep aids and still managed to jack off on my cat before passing out

>>4861289
It falls to the ground accelerating at 2g

>>4861289
nothing?

>>4861306

Nope.

>>4861289
>That feel when you don't know how to do this

How do I fix this, /sci/? ;_;

>>4861314
Pls go

>>4861309
something!?

>>4861297
This.

Anon said "exactly equal" not "equal and opposite".

>>4861322

Oh, sorry, that was my mistake. I don't mean the problem to turn into some stupid semantic problem. I mean exactly equal in magnitude, it's oppositely directed.

>>4861328

Besides, a helicopter that's hovering one instant and pushing itself down to the Earth in the next doesn't make any sense.

>>4861289

Define 'Hovering in flight'

>>4861328
blades create pressure,but it gains lift

what torque is the tail rotor applying to the helicopter?

OP these are not accomplishments, that's just random shit from your life.

>>4861328
The problem is a vector problem. Direction is crucial.
So you aren't talking about the thrust generated by the blades? Are you simply talking about the normal force applied by the helicopter onto its blades, which to equal 9.8N, so the blades must weigh 0.98 kg, so it probably can't fly unless the helicopter is remote controlled.

I taught myself calculus in the 9th grade. I don't see what the big deal is.

>>4861347
not the problem giver, but have this pic

>>4861340

That's just the context of the problem. Let me restate/reframe the question to remove any ambiguity:

"A helicopter is at rest on the surface of Earth. As its blades begin to turn, it begins to produce a thrust oppositely directed to gravity. After a while, this thrust is exactly equal (but again, oppositely directed), to the force of gravity. What happens to the Helicopter if this thrust continues to balance gravity?"

I just wrote the problem right now, so if you have any questions that I didn't foresee, just ask.

>>4861328
it moves at a constant velocity either directly up or directly down

not OP

>>4861350
I taught myself calculus I II III and linear algebra in a previous life and was born with all memories of my previous lives because my mother was Bene Gesserit.

Beat that.

>>4861352

if it was at rest, it stays at rest

>>4861352
gains lift

>>4861352
acceleration is zero, moves at constant velocity.
Next.

>>4861347

I thought the direction of thrust of the blades of a helicopter would be implied and intuitive. I don't want to make the question muddled. Read my restatement of the problem:

>>4861352

And no, as I said in my post, the thrust is oppositely directed to gravity. The weight of the blades is in the same direction as gravity.

>>4861352
And I'll ask again. What is the rear rotor doing?

>>4861359

Uhh, yea you'll need to develop your answer more.

>>4861369
You'd make a hopeless teacher.

>>4861364
thrust cannot be vertical in helicopters

>>4861375
how do they hover then?

>>4861372

You'd make a hopeless student.

It looks like no one here knows how to do this without making the problem muddled. Like I said before, this isn't some semantic bullshit question.

>>4861366

Counteracting torque from the main blades but nothing else. The net effect is a force opposite and equal to gravity.

>>4861352

As they blades start spinning faster the normal force of the ground starts decreasing until it reaches 0 and lift equals weight. If the initial state was 0 velocity upwards then it stays on the ground

>>4861384

Nope.

>>4861377
lift

>>4861387
No net force, no net acceleration. Assuming the helicopter acceleration never exceeded gravity it aint going nowhere and would "hover" on the ground, if it did exceed gravity then it would keep going as fast as it was.

>>4861393

You're mistaken, it would not hover on the ground.

>>4861396
It isn't going to hover anywhere else though unless someone comes along and picks it up.

>calculus
>in grade 12

Isn't that actually stuff for grade 8? Or are amerifats really that slow?

>>4861396
>forms retarded question
>has to correct it couple of times
>question/problem still suck on balls

>>4861396
Everything, by the way, is based on the assumption that by "force of gravity" you mean the weight of the helicopter.
Also state your answer so we can check that you aren't wrong.

>>4861400

The Earth's rotation will cause the helicopter to leave the Earth. As you know, an object will go in a straight line if it is completely at rest and has no accelaration. The Earth would rotate out from under it, like if you whirled around a rock on a string and cut the string.

I hear people objecting to this all the time... they can't wrap their heads around the simple fact that a helicopter with no force with travel in a straight line, and your motion on Earth is not a straight line.

>>4861408

Yep. Also don't forget that the helicopter is standing on a rotating planet, on the japanese coast with active tectonics, and being part of the arm of our galaxy. There are forces you have forgotten!

>>4861402
Do you sleep, at all?

You're on here 24/7.

>>4861408
He cant give us the answer because he tought of this problem himself and ofcourse becase of his vast knowledge of physics he is unable to provide atleast a plausible answer or explanation.
SUMMARY:He is retarded.

>>4861404

>thinks that a fucking helicopter at rest on Earth is difficult to grasp

>>4861411
...
You do realise our value for g encompasses the angular momentum of the earth right?
In addition given that we are still in the "earth-helicopter system" we are moving with the earth, in constant free-fall.

So no, you are wrong. I hope you've learned something new today.

>>4861417
also space not working well as you can see

>>4861423

force of the blades is EXACTLY equal and opposite to that of gravity*

>>4861416

Your value of appearant g? You realize that in my problem, I specifically wrote that the helicopter has no net force, and the force from the blades is EXACTLY equal to that of the blades, right?

So no, I am using exactly the same principle that you just described. You just couldn't wrap your heard around "exactly equal to gravity", and used a value of g that ISN'T exactly equal to gravity.

>>4861402

Bro if you weren't working your way through Fermat's Theorems in kindergarten you might as well go apply to be a shit cleaner at your local horse stable.

>>4861411

That was extremely dishonest in my opinion, not to clear that the helicopter was being observed from a non inertial frame of reference.

You'd probably fail all the 15 year olds that took an exam on parabolic motion because they considered their reference as inertial

WHAT IF HELICOPTER WAS CHARGED ,THEN WE WOULD NEED TO INCORPORATE FULL .009545 m/s2 INTO THE g CONSTANT DUE TO EARTHS FIELD.(I cant believe how the question giver is such a dumb cunt with absolute ZERO knowledge how a helicopter works)

>>4861430
True, your average McDonald's level student would have surpassed Newton, Turing and Einstein by puberty. If you can't even into algebraic topology before walking you're just not going to make it in the hard science.

>>4861423
So then, how high would it go?

>>4861432

When I was first presented with that problem I had no trouble considering the rotation of Earth. Also, I'd never go back to teach high school.

But no, I won't lie. I knew that people were have a hard time with it when I told them "No, it wouldn't just stay there!" That's why I chose it.

>>4861433

lawl

Time to go to bed. I hope you all had fun with my question.

>>4861437
could you present a plausible solution?

>>4861383
It's the iron law of teaching that a bad a teacher blames his students.

This thread is pretty much all the evidence anyone but a Dunning Kruger fucktard would need.

>>4861439

IT WOULD KEEP GOING OUT INTO SPACE EVEN THOUGH THERE ISN'T ANY AIR TO GENERATE TRUST IT WOULD JUST KEEEPPPP GOING

>>4861443

Hey man, the guy said I was a bad teacher first! It hurt my feelings, I had to retaliate!

The helicopter was standing on the exact north pole.

Where is your earth rotation effect now?

STATUS

[x] Nikolai Toldsla

>>4861444
lawl that would be handy

>>4861444

AND YES HELICOPERS RUN ON TRUST AND LOVE

>>4861411
>no net force

But you never said this, you just said the blades match gravity

There is also air resistance, as well as the motion of air from the blades.

You can't be awkward about one aspect (earth's rotation) but then hand wavy dismissive about the others.

Unless you're a shit teacher of course.

>>4861453

Okay, then consider the helicopter in a vacuum then! Jesus, how much do I have to change my question!

Not really sure it would take off.

To maintain the zero net force the helicopter would have to rotate to keep the blades tangent to the earth so that the forces were always anti-parallel. What would happen is the forces would form a couple and only rotate the helicopter exactly keeping it on the ground.

>>4861454
See what I mean?

>I left out this detail, which you are retarded for not spotting, but I'm allowed to leave out all kinds of other details because I say so.

If you do teach, I bet you are hated, and rightly.

>>4861459

>obviously trolling

I think the original question asker went to sleep, bro

>>4861454
>changes crucial facts in his question multiple times
>complains
Nice way to prove you are a douchebag

Anyone else thinks helicopters are ugly, inestable and awkward flight machines? they basically a potential trainrwck at any time. If aliens visited us and caught us using them they would declare war on us because of this shameful technology.

>>4861458
>>4861458
science, science science

Anyone else thinks helicopters are ugly, unstable and awkward flight machines? they ae basically a potential trainrwck at any time. If aliens visited us and caught us using them they would declare war on us because of this shameful technology.

>>4861461

>thinks this is the actual question asker
>completely ignores the fact that a helicopter won't even work in a vacuum

berkeley sucks and you know it

Hey Faggots,

My name is John, and I hate every single one of you. All of you are fat, retarded, no-lifes who spend every second of their day looking at stupid ass pictures. You are everything bad in the world. Honestly, have any of you ever gotten any pussy? I mean, I guess it's fun making fun of people because of your own insecurities, but you all take to a whole new level. This is even worse than jerking off to pictures on facebook.

Don't be a stranger. Just hit me with your best shot. I'm pretty much perfect. I was captain of the football team, and starter on my basketball team. What sports do you play, other than "jack off to naked drawn Japanese people"? I also get straight A's, and have a banging hot girlfriend (She just blew me; Shit was SO cash). You are all faggots who should just kill yourselves. Thanks for listening.

Pic Related: It's me and my bitch

>thinks mensa is an accomplishment
what's your squat / bench / deadlift?

>>4861285
>abstract algebra
>not category theory

confirmed for babby-tier