OT: Any mensa members here? ;)

Chris Barcellos · November 20th, 2006, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Le

No way man, even with Elvis on the plane, the plane will fly.

The reason is down in the avionics bay underneath the cockpit is a Rockwell Automation Retro-Encabulator that not only provides inverse reactive current for use in unilateral phase detractors but is also capable of automatically synchronizing cardinal grammeters. Check it out for yourself:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...89882805593268

Case closed. This baby is going to fly.

Tim:

Actually, what the Rockwell people are saying is it won't fly without the Automation Retro-Encabulator. But that equipment wasn't included in the original scenario. So it won't fly....

Jim Michael · November 21st, 2006, 06:33 AM

So, which came first: the chicken or the egg? Why?

Nick Jushchyshyn · November 21st, 2006, 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Alvarez

The conveyor belt only moves 'in reverse' in response to the planes forward motion... being driven by the thrust of the engines. It cannot/does not/ move the plane backwards, or cause it to remain stationary.

And with that,

The earth IS round.

It revolves AROUND the sun.

Elvis is STILL dead.

The. Plane. Will. Fly.

I'm outahere....

I thought that the Earth ORBITS around the sun and revolves around it's AXIS. No?
:p

Kyle Ringin · November 22nd, 2006, 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Le

The reason is down in the avionics bay underneath the cockpit is a Rockwell Automation Retro-Encabulator that not only provides inverse reactive current for use in unilateral phase detractors but is also capable of automatically synchronizing cardinal grammeters.

Hehe. All the guys here at work found that hilarious.
Yes, it's an engineering department...

Michael Struthers · November 22nd, 2006, 06:45 PM

So in answer to the title of this thread....

apparently not! ;-)

John Miller · November 22nd, 2006, 06:48 PM

Hmmm....if you read the whole thread, I think the answer is still out there waiting to be found!

(I think it will fly because the wheels decouple the airframe (where the thrust is) from the conveyor belt.)

Mike Teutsch · November 22nd, 2006, 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Struthers

So in answer to the title of this thread....

apparently not! ;-)

That's great Michael, you may have the ultimate post on this thread!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

One Michael to another!

Mike

Anhar Miah · December 7th, 2006, 10:44 AM

The Classical Question of “Chicken and Egg”, this question is always asked and asked, therefore I have devised a simple FAQ

Question:

“What came first the Chicken or the Egg?”

Answer:

This question was first asked to demonstrate the circular argument for biogenesis, its a circular reference and thus can not have an answer, it ends in an infinite regress. The only solution is an external agent that is not dependent within the co-dependent loop, i.e. a Creator.

Formal mathematical answer:

(1) Co-existence of two co-dependent entities A and B
(2) A can not exist without the prior existence of B
(3) B can not exist without the prior existence of A
(4) From (2) and (3) a closed loop occurs.

Therefore either can not come first (due to the closed loop), the ONLY solution is to have an independent agent OUTSIDE of the closed loop to bring about the first entity within the loop.

I hope that helps

Anhar Hussain Miah

P.S The plane does fly, I was going to derive from first principle, INCLUDING the control system mathematics involved in the "treadmill", because the feedback system will indeed have a slight delay, but in the end I realised that unlike a Car that requires the friction between the wheel and the road to move forward, the the plane uses propulsion from the engines thrust to move forward (thats the key difference) and perhaps the reason as to why people are having problems in visualizing the riddle.

J. Stephen McDonald · December 7th, 2006, 02:11 PM

Some good points stated here and some that seem a bit slanted by a version of Creation Theory.

About chickens: In fact, an egg is a part of every chicken, as much as a placenta and umbilical cord are or have been a part of each one of us. It's included in our genetic codes to have them, even though at hatching or birth, they are discarded and only a small reminder is evident in our case, that they were ever present (Mariette Hartley having two and Kyle XD having none, being rare exceptions). Therefore, neither the chicken or the egg came first, as being integral parts of a single entity, they evolved together from the earliest ancestor that was a clump of self-replicating proteins in the sea. This amorphous forebear preceded eggs, legs, wings or early morning crowing, but nevertheless, is the root of the chicken's family tree.

Anhar Miah · December 7th, 2006, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J. Stephen McDonald

Some good points stated here and some that seem a bit slanted by a version of Creation Theory.

About chickens: In fact, an egg is a part of every chicken, as much as a placenta and umbilical cord are or have been a part of each one of us. It's included in our genetic codes to have them, even though at hatching or birth, they are discarded and only a small reminder is evident in our case, that they were ever present (Mariette Hartley having two and Kyle XD having none, being rare exceptions). Therefore, neither the chicken or the egg came first, as being integral parts of a single entity, they evolved together from the earliest ancestor that was a clump of self-replicating proteins in the sea. This amorphous forebear preceded eggs, legs, wings or early morning crowing, but nevertheless, is the root of the chicken's family tree.

Mr J. Stephen McDonald, with the greatest of respect I have to stress and disagree that, Unfortunately your entire reasoning depends on assuming from the very foundation that the Modern Synthesis of evolution is actually correct, however a very large part of humanity does not subscribe to that philosophical worldview, further more I see no scientific reason to accept such a false model.

Of course I can see this thread descending into Evolution Vs ID debate, which I will gracefully wish to opt out for the sake of the thread.

However if you wish to know why I have come to such a conclusion, then if you email me I will be more than happy to email the entire transcript of my formal debate on the very topic (Which I won) :)

Anhar Hussain Miah

Chris Hurd · December 8th, 2006, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anhar Miah

Of course I can see this thread descending into Evolution Vs ID debate, which I will gracefully wish to opt out for the sake of the thread.

Thank you in advance, as we will not use this forum to debate evolution vs. intelligent design. They are, after, completely synonymous terms which both describe the exact same process (in other words, evolution is the mechanism of creation). Thus a "debate" is not only inappropriate, but also impossible, at least in the context of this forum. There, I've managed to iterate that we will not pursue poltical or religious topics here, while getting my own viewpoint aired. Now I can enjoy the morning. Yes, the plane will fly.

Jad Meouchy · February 23rd, 2007, 10:13 AM

If there is no air moving over the wings (no airspeed), there is no lift and there may as well not be any wings at all. It is difficult to take off without wings. However, it is possible to take off without wheels.

As for the lasers, I believe c+k = c, so the light will arrive at the same time regardless of the plane's sublight speed. I could be wrong, though, as I am not well versed in physics.

J. Stephen McDonald · February 23rd, 2007, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jad Meouchy

If there is no air moving over the wings (no airspeed), there is no lift and there may as well not be any wings at all. It is difficult to take off without wings. However, it is possible to take off without wheels.

As for the lasers, I believe c+k = c, so the light will arrive at the same time regardless of the plane's sublight speed. I could be wrong, though, as I am not well versed in physics.

1. Who says there's no air moving over the wings?

2. This assumption is based on the theory that there's the equivalent of a universe-wide grid, within which light moves at a uniform speed that relates only to the grid and not to any motion of an object within the grid, from which the light emanates. The obvious fallacy in this theory is, that if it were true, there would be no Doppler Effect, which causes light coming from celestial bodies to shift in its position in the color spectrum, in relation to its relative speed, towards or away from an observer.

Pete Bauer · February 23rd, 2007, 07:35 PM

Arrrghh! This thread has reappeared!
Dang it. I KNEW we shoulda locked this thread last time it went quiet!
;-)

Larry Vaughn · March 8th, 2007, 12:34 AM

The laser question doesn't give enough information. Is the target in the air or on the ground? Is it an orbiting deathstar satellite? What altitude? How high up is the tower where the laser is?

Depending on this info, the distance from the target to the planes laser might be less than the distance from the tower to the target. If the distance is less, the closest laser beam will strike first.

November 22nd, 2006, 06:45 PM	#125
Michael Struthers Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: SF, Ca Posts: 421	So in answer to the title of this thread.... apparently not! ;-) __________________ Michael Struthers www.buzzdigital.com

December 7th, 2006, 10:44 AM	#128
Anhar Miah Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: United Kindom, England Posts: 290	The Plane indeed will fly The Classical Question of “Chicken and Egg”, this question is always asked and asked, therefore I have devised a simple FAQ Question: “What came first the Chicken or the Egg?” Answer: This question was first asked to demonstrate the circular argument for biogenesis, its a circular reference and thus can not have an answer, it ends in an infinite regress. The only solution is an external agent that is not dependent within the co-dependent loop, i.e. a Creator. Formal mathematical answer: (1) Co-existence of two co-dependent entities A and B (2) A can not exist without the prior existence of B (3) B can not exist without the prior existence of A (4) From (2) and (3) a closed loop occurs. Therefore either can not come first (due to the closed loop), the ONLY solution is to have an independent agent OUTSIDE of the closed loop to bring about the first entity within the loop. I hope that helps Anhar Hussain Miah P.S The plane does fly, I was going to derive from first principle, INCLUDING the control system mathematics involved in the "treadmill", because the feedback system will indeed have a slight delay, but in the end I realised that unlike a Car that requires the friction between the wheel and the road to move forward, the the plane uses propulsion from the engines thrust to move forward (thats the key difference) and perhaps the reason as to why people are having problems in visualizing the riddle. __________________ The IT Ninja Learn, Teach, Grow..

December 7th, 2006, 02:11 PM	#129
J. Stephen McDonald Major Player Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Eugene, Oregon Posts: 909	Some good points stated here and some that seem a bit slanted by a version of Creation Theory. About chickens: In fact, an egg is a part of every chicken, as much as a placenta and umbilical cord are or have been a part of each one of us. It's included in our genetic codes to have them, even though at hatching or birth, they are discarded and only a small reminder is evident in our case, that they were ever present (Mariette Hartley having two and Kyle XD having none, being rare exceptions). Therefore, neither the chicken or the egg came first, as being integral parts of a single entity, they evolved together from the earliest ancestor that was a clump of self-replicating proteins in the sea. This amorphous forebear preceded eggs, legs, wings or early morning crowing, but nevertheless, is the root of the chicken's family tree. __________________ Steve McDonald https://onedrive.com/?cid=229807ce52dd4fe0 http://www.flickr.com/photos/22121562@N00/ http://www.vimeo.com/user458315/videos

February 23rd, 2007, 07:35 PM	#134
Pete Bauer Wrangler Join Date: May 2003 Location: Eagle River, AK Posts: 4,100	Arrrghh! This thread has reappeared! Dang it. I KNEW we shoulda locked this thread last time it went quiet! ;-) __________________ Pete Bauer The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. Albert Einstein Trying to solve a DV mystery? You may find the answer behind the SEARCH function ... or be able to join a discussion already in progress!

March 8th, 2007, 12:34 AM	#135
Larry Vaughn Major Player Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Gainesville, FL Posts: 201	unanswered information The laser question doesn't give enough information. Is the target in the air or on the ground? Is it an orbiting deathstar satellite? What altitude? How high up is the tower where the laser is? Depending on this info, the distance from the target to the planes laser might be less than the distance from the tower to the target. If the distance is less, the closest laser beam will strike first.

November 21st, 2006, 06:33 AM	#122
Jim Michael Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 895	So, which came first: the chicken or the egg? Why?

November 22nd, 2006, 06:48 PM	#126
John Miller Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Hillsborough, NC, USA Posts: 968	Hmmm....if you read the whole thread, I think the answer is still out there waiting to be found! (I think it will fly because the wheels decouple the airframe (where the thrust is) from the conveyor belt.)

February 23rd, 2007, 10:13 AM	#132
Jad Meouchy Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 663	If there is no air moving over the wings (no airspeed), there is no lift and there may as well not be any wings at all. It is difficult to take off without wings. However, it is possible to take off without wheels. As for the lasers, I believe c+k = c, so the light will arrive at the same time regardless of the plane's sublight speed. I could be wrong, though, as I am not well versed in physics.