webm thread
Webm thread
Christopher Collins
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Isaac Gonzalez
>freezing light waves
>not freezing the air around it
Ok
David Morales
NOOOO, what movie is this?
I must watch it.
Chase Nelson
The Flash TV series.
Jack Barnes
My sister watches this. They really don't bother even with highschool science it's all just about drama and girls and the guy's dad being wrongly imprisoned and more drama.
Jason Brown
...
Thomas Bennett
This thread reminds me of the old lightsaber laser arguments. So I'm going to use the same refute. It isn't a laser, but a plasma they are freezing.
Charles Bell
...
Sebastian Lewis
...
Ayden Allen
...
Evan Mitchell
>pompei.webm
Matthew Lee
What is this?
Brandon Walker
quite simple actually
Gabriel Lewis
Fluid dynamics/mudslides/pyroclastic flow maybe?
Daniel Baker
hydraulic flow of liquids with different densities combined with diffusion and mixed laminar/turbulent flow
Julian Ramirez
lel thanks for posting, apparently all my memories of fluid mech are long gone
Gavin Scott
...
Carson Richardson
Wow, why?
Dylan Phillips
that's really freaky
how does it work?
Thomas Turner
Magic
Colton Robinson
...
Andrew Fisher
Leo Brown
I want to do this so bad now
My life is unfulfilled because of you fagot
Aiden Martin
>en.wikipedia.org
>Therefore, even a small disturbance along other axes causes the object to 'flip'.
So can this effect be considered a "butterfly effect" where the initial conditions are so hard to control that the axis appears unstable? If theoretically we could apply a "perfect" torque, would the secondary axis still be unstable? I've been trying to read up on this effect on youtube comments and wikipedia but all I've found are dead links and pleb explanations. It seems from everyones explanations that the secondary axis is inherently unstable and it has nothing to do with initial conditions, but the wikipedia article implies it does.
I'll be taking classical mechanics this semester so I guess I'll figure it out soon enough. I've just always wondered about this since I first watched that webm years ago. Usually ISS videos come with a nice scientific explanation but unfortunately I could not find one of those for this. Maybe NASA doesn't fully understand it themselves? The lack of explanations on /sci and everywhere else I look shows this is much more complicated than it looks.
Nolan Barnes
...
Evan Stewart
...
Jonathan Collins
...
Nathaniel Bailey
...
Joshua Reyes
computer virus.
Ethan Morales
...
Robert Anderson
...
Carter Martinez
...
Grayson Bell
...
Eli Hill
>If theoretically we could apply a "perfect" torque, would the secondary axis still be unstable?
Yes, provided the three principle moments of inertia are distinct i.e. it's not a sphere of cylinder.
As for explanations, the wikipedia article was essentially how it was taught to me in my astrodynamics class. Attached is a snippet from Greenwood's Principle of Dynamics. The text is somewhat notorious for being a hard read as it was written in the 60s.
It boils down to a second order ODE of which the stability depends on the sign of the coefficient on the zeroth order term. If the coefficient is positive you get a nicely bounded solution courtesy of simple harmonic motion. If the coefficient is negative then you get an exponential solution which blows up in time.
Jason Brooks
I thought it was a dick
Christopher Powell
this real?