| Author | Message | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 3274 Registered: 9-2009 |
They were moving at great speed, which meant they were almost stationary. | ||
| Rbruma (Rbruma)
New member Username: Rbruma Post Number: 552 Registered: 9-2009 |
Very long shot in the dark (to eliminate the obvious): are spokes relevant? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 3276 Registered: 9-2009 |
Very long shot in the dark (to eliminate the obvious): are spokes relevant? Good guess, but no. | ||
| Mattiel (Mattiel)
New member Username: Mattiel Post Number: 468 Registered: 6-2005 |
To pursue Razvan's exploration, satellites relevant? Or in general, space transportation relevant? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 3278 Registered: 9-2009 |
To pursue Razvan's exploration, satellites relevant? Or in general, space transportation relevant? Also good guesses, but unfortunately wrong. | ||
| Mattiel (Mattiel)
New member Username: Mattiel Post Number: 469 Registered: 6-2005 |
Is it correct to say that they were moving at a great speed with respect to one reference point, while they were almost stationary with respect to another reference point? For instance, a train travelling opposite to the earth rotation direction at the same speed results in a stationary movement when observed from the sun? Anything like this? | ||
| Rbruma (Rbruma)
New member Username: Rbruma Post Number: 555 Registered: 9-2009 |
Back to the basics then: They: objects? tangible ones? ideas? humans? animals? Relevant how many were 'they'? Were they moving from one (physical) place to another? Was there a translation movement? A rotation? Great speed: the speed of light? 100 mph? Less than this? In between? Heisenberg's principle relevant or at least OTRT? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 3281 Registered: 9-2009 |
Is it correct to say that they were moving at a great speed with respect to one reference point, while they were almost stationary with respect to another reference point? Yes indeed. For instance, a train travelling opposite to the earth rotation direction at the same speed results in a stationary movement when observed from the sun? Anything like this? Trains, the sun or the earth's rotation are not relevant, but you're OTRT. Back to the basics then: They: objects? tangible ones? This... ideas? humans? ...and this. animals? Relevant how many were 'they'? Not really. Assume 5-10 in total. Were they moving from one (physical) place to another? Yes. Was there a translation movement? This. A rotation? Great speed: the speed of light? 100 mph? Less than this? In between? Less than 100 mph. Heisenberg's principle relevant or at least OTRT? No. | ||
| Mattiel (Mattiel)
New member Username: Mattiel Post Number: 472 Registered: 6-2005 |
Tangible objects: vehicles? Are you talking about speed of people doing skydiving by pure chance? Were the 5-10 humans stationary with respect to each other? To the objects? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 3285 Registered: 9-2009 |
Tangible objects: vehicles? See below. Are you talking about speed of people doing skydiving by pure chance? Yes indeed! Were the 5-10 humans stationary with respect to each other? To the objects? The objects are their parachutes. Assume the skydivers move at he same speed as their parachutes. Relative (non)movements between skydiver and parachute, or between skydivers, are irrelevant. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 5792 Registered: 4-2010 |
Air resistance relevant? Terminal velocity? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 3292 Registered: 9-2009 |
Air resistance relevant? Yes. Terminal velocity? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 5801 Registered: 4-2010 |
Were the parachutes capable of moving at much higher speeds than their skydiving counterparts? But only were able to go as fast as the skydiver? By the way, are the parachutes in this puzzle open? Packed? | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 5802 Registered: 4-2010 |
Were the parachutes capable of moving at much higher speeds than their skydiving counterparts? But only were able to go as fast as the skydiver? By the way, are the parachutes in this puzzle open? Packed? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 3294 Registered: 9-2009 |
Were the parachutes capable of moving at much higher speeds than their skydiving counterparts? But only were able to go as fast as the skydiver? No. you can regard the skydiver and his parachute as one entity for the purposes of the puzzle. By the way, are the parachutes in this puzzle open? Packed? They are open and flying. | ||
| Rbruma (Rbruma)
New member Username: Rbruma Post Number: 559 Registered: 9-2009 |
Were they almost stationary for an observer on the ground? In a plane? For fellow skydivers? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 3299 Registered: 9-2009 |
Were they almost stationary for an observer on the ground? This. In a plane? For fellow skydivers? | ||
| Rbruma (Rbruma)
New member Username: Rbruma Post Number: 560 Registered: 9-2009 |
Was their 'airspeed' that was great? But they somehow flew 'against the wind', so they were not moving significantly with respect to the ground? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 3303 Registered: 9-2009 |
Was their 'airspeed' that was great? But they somehow flew 'against the wind', so they were not moving significantly with respect to the ground? Yes indeed! ***SPOILER*** It was a particularly windy day at a drop zone I visited. Everyone with less than 500 jumps, which includes me, were grounded. And the people doing swoop landings, who are usually speeding across the ground, were today moving at an apparent leisurely pace because of the headwind. |
