Re: [Phys-l] Bad physics in National park

[Gary Karshner <gkarshner@stmarytx.edu>]

John,
        Thanks for the nice reference to how air foils work. I tried to 
find the Wright Brother's original patent to see if I could find how they 
thought wings worked, but my browser would not open the files.
        This last week in the news there was an article about how bumble 
bees fly from highs speed camera observations. At one time it was shown 
that bumble bees couldn't fly as their wings do not supply enough lift. In 
the course of more detailed modeling it was found that there bodies supply 
the extra lift needed. This was applied into the design of transport 
planes. Now I assume all planes. These latest observations point out there 
wing action is not near maximum efficiency, and they give up some 
efficiency for maneuverability.

Gary

.
At 07:52 AM 5/22/2009 -0700, you wrote:
> On 05/22/2009 07:37 AM, Scott Nara wrote:
> > I'm curious here and am going to take a moment to make sure my own
> > understanding is solid.  Are you arguing against a Bernoullian perspective
> > or against their explaination of the Bernoullian perspective?
>
> Strictly speaking, there is nothing wrong with Bernoulli's principle.
>
> Alas Bernoulli's principle is often misused, but that is neither here
> nor there;  the same can be said of Newton's laws of motion, which can
> be misused in innumerable ways, as our students constantly remind us.
>
> >  From my
> > understanding, Bernoulli's principle is applicable here.
>
> Yes, it is.
>
> The "National Park" explanation as described by Donald Smith was wrong
> long before it got to Bernoulli.
>
> ==========
>
> A careful, detailed, illustrated explanation of how a wing works can be
> found at
>   http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/airfoils.html
> _______________________________________________
> Forum for Physics Educators
> Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
> https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l