Well, I guess all I can say is that I don't have the temperament to play "thought experiments", or to spend endless cycles getting all hand wavy about serious, complex physical systems behavior. Regarding the issue of water flowing down the drain which originally started this thread, there are approximately 1.27 x 10^26 molecules of water per gallon, all interacting with each other, and the boundary layers that are defined by the air/water interfaces and the water/vessel interfaces. The forces that define the nature of these interactions are fairly well understood, and have been modeled at some degree of resolution or another countless times. So, what's the point of launching a hand-waving expedition about the phenomenon? I just don't get it.
--Doug -- Doug Roberts drobe...@rti.org d...@parrot-farm.net http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins <http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins> 505-455-7333 - Office 505-670-8195 - Cell On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 10:34 PM, <plissa...@comcast.net> wrote: > Klowns like me are often misinterpreted, as noted by Yorick. I am > ardently in favor of experiment, carefully observed. It is the basis of > all science. But, but, the interpretation of observed phenomena must also be > dealt with carefully. Voodoo has a pernicious way of creeping in. After > all, for two thousand years we knew that malaria was caused by the bad air > of the low, swampy places where it was prevalent, and deadly. It was only > in 1896, after the Anopheles mosquitoes started reading the Annals of > Tropical Medicine in the Lancet (not by a Limey, but Dr. Ronald Ross, an > admirable Scots physician) that the little critters realized that they had > the God-given gift of spreading the disease by biting white people, and thus > helped the indigenous populations by keeping Europeans out of the “White > Man’s Grave”. ****** > > ** ** > > I love observations, and it is not for me to challenge what people see. If > pious folks observe the image of the Virgin Mary on a half-baked tortilla, I > say, “Let it be”. She certainly has Power to do that, according to Those > in the Know, and it seems to me like a folksy, open-hearted gesture on Her > Part, that our president would do well to emulate.**** > > ** ** > > But, a little learning is a dangerous thing, and it is injudicious to draw > conclusions from phenomena that one does not understand the physics of. It > is certainly valid for an honest amateur to ask, “But how can I know if my > theory is Voodoo?” Here are some modest proposals: first, study as much > as you can about the subject, second, understand it well enough to use the > professional technical terms of the discipline and then, third, ask a few > knowledgeable folks privately for their opinions.**** > > ** ** > > So, follows some constructive suggestions. Read. Learn. The Picasso of > irrotational rotating viscous/inviscid flows was an amiable Top Brit, Sir > Geoffrey Ingram Taylor. He is probably now sitting on some Tiepolo cloud > up there watching with satisfaction the grand swirling vortical structure of > the firmament of the heavens. I knew him as a lofty figure, and was > honored to present the G I Taylor Memorial Lecture at a university far from > here some 20 years ago. There is lotsa stuff on GI on the internet that > one can read and learn from – in particular the Taylor-Proudman theorem that > has a special charm for me, since before his name was immortalized, I was a > lowly scholar in Dr. Proudman’s grad. fluid mechanics classes at ****** > Cambridge****. He would not remember, but I recall him, as I melted > silently, respectfully, into the woodwork of those 17 th century desks. Fer > Gawd’s Sake, ****Newton**** sat right there! I held my peace. Dumb > questions (which were all I could muster then, and even now) were not > encouraged in the Old Maths Schools at the University.**** > > ** ** > > As for asking folks, it is my modest guess that, for all their many fine > qualities, not too many Friam correspondents have that much background in > the very esoteric, and charmingly pointless, subject of pouring fluids outa > bottles – unless they be of a good vintage. But I will answer privately > things that folk may ask personally, to the extent I am capable.**** > > ** ** > > It is nice, and generous, for the blind to lead the blind, but the truth is > seldom approached by that sorta debate. It takes hard work, intelligence and > the learning of new ideas.**** > > ** ** > > Incidentally, with reference to some discussions of high and low pressures > at surfaces: ALL free surfaces for ANY fluid motion with stationary air as > the contiguous external fluid are at the same CONSTANT pressure. How could > they be otherwise? > > Peter Lissaman, Da Vinci Ventures > > Expertise is not knowing everything, but knowing what to look for. > > 1454 Miracerros Loop South, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505,USA > tel:(505)983-7728 > > ------------------------------ > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org >
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
