Electroboom: How Right IS Veritasium?! Don't Electrons Push Each Other??

[electrodacus]

Yes. Excellent example. The energy storage you're searching for is: the wheels, the gears, the propeller blades and the vehicle.

Yes they are all energy storage devices but none of them allow exceeding wind speed in the way they are connected to vehicle.
You can with blackbird as it is exceed wind speed in theory without storing pressure differential energy storage while below wind speed.
They were allowed to have variable pitch propeller (why not as the judges had no idea what energy storage is).
So imagine a blackbird set with propeller blades at zero so no propulsion due to propeller and no energy storage.
The propeller will be geared to spin very fast so part of the wind energy will be stored as rotational kinetic energy (basically a flywheel) then this ideal vehicle can get to wind speed but not faster and this is where the pilot starts to change the propeller pitch converting the flywheel stored energy in to vehicle kinetic energy thus increasing for a bit the speed of the vehicle above wind speed.
But this is a different method of accelerating the vehicle above wind speed using stored kinetic energy in flywheel and not stored pressure differential.

[gnuarm]

You aren't understanding.  The sails move at a quarter the rate of the vehicle.  So when the vehicle is moving at twice the speed of the wind, the wind is still hitting the sails at one half the wind speed relative to the ground. 

Uh, no, the sails move from the front of the vehicle to the rear in a straight line along a belt.  The sails collapse on reaching the rear, so they can follow the belt under the vehicle and be pulled back up on reaching the front of the car.  I created this model.  If you don't understand, I suggest you create an animation to help you visualize it.

You literally can't understand this can you?  The only speed of the sail that matters, is the speed when it is catching the wind.  At that time it is moving wrt to the ground slower than the wind, so receives power from the wind, while the car is moving forward, faster than the wind. 

Please create the animation.  But if you think the velocity of the sail when it is folded up has anything to do with the problem, there is nothing anyone can say to you to help you understand, or.... you do understand, but you are not capable of acknowledging you have been wrong all this time.  Even money, either way.

I can create an animation in my head and since I know the physics involved it will be consistent with reality.

You clearly are failing to understand the physics. 

The sail move at a quarter of the vehicle speed when it is above the vehicle and at one and a quarter the vehicle speed when bellow the vehicle with average sail speed being exactly the speed of the vehicle.
That is what it means to move around the vehicle.

Since no balls can hit any part of the vehicle including the sail when their average speed is equal the vehicle kinetic energy can not increase thus speed can not increase.

You just failed both your physics test and your math test. 

No sail is moving at the "average" speed, so that is completely irrelevant.  The wind will impact the sail when it is moving at half the speed of the wind.  When it is moving at any other speed, it is furled up and not impacted by the wind.

You literally do not understand physics... or more likely, you understand perfectly, but like playing your troll game.

Blah, blah, blah.  The sail does not exceed the speed of the wind, so the equation applies perfectly.

On blackbird the sail exceeds wind speed when vehicle exceeds the wind speed as they do have the exactly same speed.

This is not a blackbird where you don't understand the physics.  This is a different mechanism where you don't understand the physics.

Blah, blah, blah...  you can't squirm your way out of this with your nonsense.  None of that applies to a sail boat.  This is just a sail boat geared to the car.  Wind on sail, moving the car faster than the wind, while the sail moves slower than the wind.  There is no energy storage bunkum like you want to apply to the Blackbird.

No sail boat or sail vehicle can exceed wind speed directly downwind.

Any yet, they do, as proven by the multiple videos. 

You have entered another realm of denial.  I'm not going to continue to listen to your BS.  I'm convinced that no one who claims to understand physics would not understand this simple model.  So you must be trolling. 

[electrodacus]

Again, I defined the word YOU used so you should know.
The propeller applies the force on the car, car speed relative to ground, and mechanical power on input is what comes from the wheels (by gears).

What you said is correct in still air, and completely incorrect when there's a wind.
Of course you didn't prove what you said so you shouldn't be surprised it's completely incorrect.

If you prefer, you take my example above where the propeller takes 1000W of wind power, and puts 300W in the car so it's "30% efficient" (for a different definition of efficiency, obviously).

Thanks for clarifying the definition.

Say we are at wind speed so the force applied by propeller is the only one as air particle have same speed thus wind speed relative to vehicle is zero.

We start with input and say that vehicle speed and wind  speed are equal at 10m/s
Vehicle takes at the wheels 100W that means a braking force of 100W/10m/s = 10N
Take this 100W and apply to propeller witch is say 70% efficient (ideal case will be 100% obviously never, ever more than 100%)
So the force that propeller will apply will be ( 100W / 10m/s ) * 0.7 = 7N
Since braking force is higher than propulsion force the vehicle will slow down.

When vehicle is below wind speed it will be helped by wind but once at wind speed and above wind power is no longer able to help the vehicle increase kinetic energy but on the contrary it will start to hinder that. 

[electrodacus]

The world land speed record for a wind-powered vehicle was broken on 26 March 2009 by Briton Richard Jenkins in his yacht Greenbird with a speed of 126.1 mph (202.9 km/h). Wind speeds were fluctuating between 30–50 mph (48–80 km/h) at that time.

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Land_sailing

Do you understand that we are discussing the special case of direct downwind ?
A sail vehicle traveling at an angle to wind with best case perpendicular to wind direction can exceed wind speed and maintain that indefinitely as wind speed relative to vehicle is not zero.
With direct down wind as soon as vehicle speed equals wind speed the wind speed relative to vehicle will be zero and thus no wind power available to vehicle.

[electrodacus]

I'm not sure, but I think ED is playing dumb so he doesn't have to deal with the reality of this car which clearly can move down wind faster than the wind.  He will insist on changing the case and turn it into something where he can obfuscate and confuse the facts.

Exactly that. It would be the prefect definition of trolling technique were it not that he believes what he's posting.

I promise I believe what I post. And believe is not even the right word since I know that is the case (it is how the universe works).
The equation that I use predict exactly what happens.
What you claim is not what happens. As blackbird or the treadmill vehicle are both reducing the acceleration rate as stored energy is used up and they will decelerate as soon as all that stored energy is used up. 
But you claim the vehicle will always accelerate (increase speed) witch is inconsistent with energy conservation.
Best case you are describing a vehicle driving perpendicular to wind direction not direct down wind. 

[electrodacus]

Any yet, they do, as proven by the multiple videos. 

You have entered another realm of denial.  I'm not going to continue to listen to your BS.  I'm convinced that no one who claims to understand physics would not understand this simple model.  So you must be trolling.

Zig zag is not direct down wind.

[gnuarm]

I'm not sure, but I think ED is playing dumb so he doesn't have to deal with the reality of this car which clearly can move down wind faster than the wind.  He will insist on changing the case and turn it into something where he can obfuscate and confuse the facts.

Exactly that. It would be the prefect definition of trolling technique were it not that he believes what he's posting.

No, no one is so stupid as to believe the "average" speed of the sails are what is important when the sails are furled when moving in one direction, and open to catch the wind when moving in the other direction. 

He's playing with us.  This has never been about finding the truth or believing one idea over another.  A troll is a troll.  Trolls are best ignored, even if they seem to be talking sense.  That is just their way to lure you in, to resume talking to them. 

I am glad that I was able to find a thought experiment that is simple enough to explain to a teenager.  Now, when someone talks about how the blackbird can't possibly work, I know how to explain it to them, so they can understand, even without knowing very much about physics or math. 

I wish I could create an animation, but I have a million other things to do.

[gnuarm]

Any yet, they do, as proven by the multiple videos. 

You have entered another realm of denial.  I'm not going to continue to listen to your BS.  I'm convinced that no one who claims to understand physics would not understand this simple model.  So you must be trolling.

Zig zag is not direct down wind.

Why are you babbling about zig-zag? 

[electrodacus]

No, no one is so stupid as to believe the "average" speed of the sails are what is important when the sails are furled when moving in one direction, and open to catch the wind when moving in the other direction. 

He's playing with us.  This has never been about finding the truth or believing one idea over another.  A troll is a troll.  Trolls are best ignored, even if they seem to be talking sense.  That is just their way to lure you in, to resume talking to them. 

I am glad that I was able to find a thought experiment that is simple enough to explain to a teenager.  Now, when someone talks about how the blackbird can't possibly work, I know how to explain it to them, so they can understand, even without knowing very much about physics or math. 

I wish I could create an animation, but I have a million other things to do.

If you suffer from aphantasia then you will need an animation to understand.
If the vehicle speed is 10m/s the sail travels at 2.5m/s relative to ground for half the time (when it is above the vehicle) and at 12.5m/s relative to ground for the other half the time when it is under the vehicle. 
What is the average speed relative to the ground ?

Why are you babbling about zig-zag?

A sail vehicle will need to travel at an angle to wind direction in order to exceed wind speed.
No sail vehicle can travel directly downwind and exceed or even get to wind speed.
If you change directions all the time so that your net direction is downwind it means you are moving in zig-zag.  This will not be considered direct downwind.

[gnuarm]

No, no one is so stupid as to believe the "average" speed of the sails are what is important when the sails are furled when moving in one direction, and open to catch the wind when moving in the other direction. 

He's playing with us.  This has never been about finding the truth or believing one idea over another.  A troll is a troll.  Trolls are best ignored, even if they seem to be talking sense.  That is just their way to lure you in, to resume talking to them. 

I am glad that I was able to find a thought experiment that is simple enough to explain to a teenager.  Now, when someone talks about how the blackbird can't possibly work, I know how to explain it to them, so they can understand, even without knowing very much about physics or math. 

I wish I could create an animation, but I have a million other things to do.

If you suffer from aphantasia then you will need an animation to understand.

The animation is for you and others who clearly don't understand what is going on.  But it won't help a troll, so maybe not for you.

If the vehicle speed is 10m/s the sail travels at 2.5m/s relative to ground for half the time (when it is above the vehicle) and at 12.5m/s relative to ground for the other half the time when it is under the vehicle. 
What is the average speed relative to the ground ?

Irrelevant.

Why are you babbling about zig-zag?

A sail vehicle will need to travel at an angle to wind direction in order to exceed wind speed.
No sail vehicle can travel directly downwind and exceed or even get to wind speed.
If you change directions all the time so that your net direction is downwind it means you are moving in zig-zag.  This will not be considered direct downwind.

No, as is shown in this example, the same leverage is gained by a mechanism that pushes the sail toward the wind on the car.  That's what tacking is doing, providing leverage to allow a vehicle to travel into the wind.  No tacking is needed nor is helpful in traveling down wind.  Using a fixed sail, a vehicle can not travel down wind faster than the wind.  Install a moving sail or a propeller, and you can travel down wind.

You are a troll.  You are a blatant, obvious troll.  You will never admit to understanding what is going on here.  The only reason you are posting is to get people to respond to you. 

I should stop feeding the troll.

[electrodacus]

No, as is shown in this example, the same leverage is gained by a mechanism that pushes the sail toward the wind on the car.  That's what tacking is doing, providing leverage to allow a vehicle to travel into the wind.  No tacking is needed nor is helpful in traveling down wind.  Using a fixed sail, a vehicle can not travel down wind faster than the wind.  Install a moving sail or a propeller, and you can travel down wind.

You are a troll.  You are a blatant, obvious troll.  You will never admit to understanding what is going on here.  The only reason you are posting is to get people to respond to you. 

I should stop feeding the troll.

Need to correct my example as it was wrong. If sail moves at 2.5m/s relative to the ground when it is above it will move at 17.5m/s when under so the average is 10m/s


Tacking will not be considered direct down wind and had nothing to do with your example or direct down wind blackbird.

When traveling at an angle to wind direction vehicle speed with low enough friction will exceed wind speed.
What happens in that case is that vehicle kinetic energy will be the energy storage device and in ideal case with no friction all you need to do is exceed wind speed at an angle to wind direction then turn directly downwind and maintain that high speed as there is no friction to slow you down.
In real world where there is friction you will need to travel in zig-zag (Tacking) witch is not direct down wind as you still use energy storage but in this case you can take advantage of the existing kinetic energy of the vehicle and used that to store energy.

[Naej]

Again, I defined the word YOU used so you should know.
The propeller applies the force on the car, car speed relative to ground, and mechanical power on input is what comes from the wheels (by gears).

What you said is correct in still air, and completely incorrect when there's a wind.
Of course you didn't prove what you said so you shouldn't be surprised it's completely incorrect.

If you prefer, you take my example above where the propeller takes 1000W of wind power, and puts 300W in the car so it's "30% efficient" (for a different definition of efficiency, obviously).

Thanks for clarifying the definition.

Say we are at wind speed so the force applied by propeller is the only one as air particle have same speed thus wind speed relative to vehicle is zero.

We start with input and say that vehicle speed and wind  speed are equal at 10m/s
Vehicle takes at the wheels 100W that means a braking force of 100W/10m/s = 10N
Take this 100W and apply to propeller witch is say 70% efficient (ideal case will be 100% obviously never, ever more than 100%)

Where is your proof that the quantity you called efficiency can never be more than 100% ?

[electrodacus]

Where is your proof that the quantity you called efficiency can never be more than 100% ?

First law of thermodynamics is something like this: Energy can be changed from one form to another, but it cannot be created or destroyed
This law also called the conservation of energy will not allow any system to be more than 100% efficient and it was never, ever demonstrated to be false thus the reason it is a law and not just a theory.

I will say at least as far as I'm concerned is the most important thing to understand in physics.

[Naej]

Where is your proof that the quantity you called efficiency can never be more than 100% ?

First law of thermodynamics is something like this: Energy can be changed from one form to another, but it cannot be created or destroyed
This law also called the conservation of energy will not allow any system to be more than 100% efficient and it was never, ever demonstrated to be false thus the reason it is a law and not just a theory.

I will say at least as far as I'm concerned is the most important thing to understand in physics.

It's a good start, but on which isolated system are you applying it?

Why with 100W brought by gears and 1000W in wind, I can't get 300W in propulsion?

[PlainName]

But you claim the vehicle will always accelerate (increase speed)

Wrong.

The equation I posted shows there is an upper limit to speed, and even without that I have never suggested it would accelerate perpetually or even at all in every case. In fact, I have expressly stated the opposite.

The equation that I use predict exactly what happens.

Wrong.

Best case you are describing a vehicle driving perpendicular to wind direction not direct down wind.

Wrong.

[SiliconWizard]

Where have the electrons gone?

[electrodacus]

It's a good start, but on which isolated system are you applying it?

Why with 100W brought by gears and 1000W in wind, I can't get 300W in propulsion?

You have two choices

a) Use the entire 1000W from wind as propulsion directly best case if what you want is to accelerate the vehicle.
b) Take 100W at the wheels so 1000W - 100W = 900W of wind propulsion plus the 100W * 0.7 = 70W from propeller total 970W worth of propulsion.
The b) assumes a 70% efficient propeller and assumes non compressible fluid.

[PlainName]

Where have the electrons gone?

See those 1.6kg balls? Well...

[electrodacus]

Where have the electrons gone?

How will someone understand electrons traveling through solid copper wire when it can not understand much larger air particles and their interaction with a vehicle.
Also how can anyone understand any part of physics if it ignores the law of conservation of energy.

For the stored energy (in a capacitor) to do any work it requires a conductor to connect the two regions with different charge (the two plates).
The electrons can get there faster or slower depending on the conductor resistance so low power for longer time or high power for a shorter period dissipated in the conductor as electromagnetic radiation as charged particles (electrons) interact with the conductor lattice.

Since conductor has thermal mass (another form of energy storage) the energy will not be radiated as electromagnetic waves immediately by the surface of the conductor but it will take some time after. This radiated electromagnetic energy by the conductor is in the form of infrared photons.
Unless the temperature of the conductor gets high enough to radiate photons in the visible spectrum or even UV. 

[electrodacus]

See those 1.6kg balls? Well...

It was 1.2kg balls in order to be equivalent to the mass of 1m³ of air.

[SiliconWizard]

Are those electrons free?

[gnuarm]

No, as is shown in this example, the same leverage is gained by a mechanism that pushes the sail toward the wind on the car.  That's what tacking is doing, providing leverage to allow a vehicle to travel into the wind.  No tacking is needed nor is helpful in traveling down wind.  Using a fixed sail, a vehicle can not travel down wind faster than the wind.  Install a moving sail or a propeller, and you can travel down wind.

You are a troll.  You are a blatant, obvious troll.  You will never admit to understanding what is going on here.  The only reason you are posting is to get people to respond to you. 

I should stop feeding the troll.

Need to correct my example as it was wrong. If sail moves at 2.5m/s relative to the ground when it is above it will move at 17.5m/s when under so the average is 10m/s


Tacking will not be considered direct down wind and had nothing to do with your example or direct down wind blackbird.

When traveling at an angle to wind direction vehicle speed with low enough friction will exceed wind speed.
What happens in that case is that vehicle kinetic energy will be the energy storage device and in ideal case with no friction all you need to do is exceed wind speed at an angle to wind direction then turn directly downwind and maintain that high speed as there is no friction to slow you down.
In real world where there is friction you will need to travel in zig-zag (Tacking) witch is not direct down wind as you still use energy storage but in this case you can take advantage of the existing kinetic energy of the vehicle and used that to store energy.

Blady, blah, blah, blah.  Blady,  blah, blah, energy storage, blah, blady, blah, blah.

It really is hard to tell if this guy is mental, or if he really is this poorly educated.  He claims to have some tech job, but that's really, really hard to imagine. 

Whatever...

[gnuarm]

Where have the electrons gone?

Long time passing.

[Naej]

It's a good start, but on which isolated system are you applying it?

Why with 100W brought by gears and 1000W in wind, I can't get 300W in propulsion?

You have two choices

a) Use the entire 1000W from wind as propulsion directly best case if what you want is to accelerate the vehicle.
b) Take 100W at the wheels so 1000W - 100W = 900W of wind propulsion plus the 100W * 0.7 = 70W from propeller total 970W worth of propulsion.
The b) assumes a 70% efficient propeller and assumes non compressible fluid.

So you agree that you can get much more propulsion out of the propeller than what you took from the wheels, thanks to the wind?
Nice, now you can understand why you can go faster than the wind 

[electrodacus]

Are those electrons free?

Yes.