Oh, I see. Yeah, I agree that Neil is not particularly impressive and I especially think his fans are generally dumb. I would definitely expect him to get helicopter autorotation wrong because he is a cosmologist which basically means he never has to do anything real with physics, lmao.
But still, his point here about jumping on an airplane is correct. I don't care if people say "ohhhh, you believe The Science Mr. Safe and Effective" or whatever. True and false are true and false and I am not going to take a false position just because it is the opposite of NDT's. I've been on an airplane traveling over 500 miles per hour and I can just open a can of seltzer and sip it calmly.
And yes, what Neil is saying is precisely why "the earth does not just fly underneath us when we jump even though it is supposedly traveling 1000 mph." You can dispute the globe if you want, but this particular argument is wrong.
Yes, but it is actually stronger than that. In addition to having no impact to jumping up and down on an airplane, or walking back and forth across the aisle (which is the same thing relative to the forward motion), there is no impediment to walking forward and backward along the aisle, which is the same axis.
It is not like you are on a plane moving 500 mph and you want to walk 5 mph to the front of the plane and you think to yourself "OK, now I have to remember that I really am accelerating myself to 505 mph." You just start walking forward as if the plane were not moving at all. Obviously, earth with a constant rotation rate is the same thing.
Honestly, I don't really care if people want to think the globe is fake and a conspiracy or whatever. But when they make arguments that are just mechanically wrong, I'm like, no that is just wrong. And since I think the "Believe The Science" crowd like Neil Tyson are definitely not what we want to promote, then we don't want to be in a position where we are very wrong and they are very right about something very obvious.
This whole "shape of the earth" thing is just one of those things. It is the most obvious one. If there were a good argument against the globe, people would not be saying that a rotating earth would move under a hovering helicopter or whatever. If there were a good argument, we would have already heard it.
Neil gave a wrong answer 2:35
https://archive.nerdist.com/man-emergency-lands-helicopter-to-teach-neil-tyson-a-physics-lesson/
Oh, I see. Yeah, I agree that Neil is not particularly impressive and I especially think his fans are generally dumb. I would definitely expect him to get helicopter autorotation wrong because he is a cosmologist which basically means he never has to do anything real with physics, lmao.
But still, his point here about jumping on an airplane is correct. I don't care if people say "ohhhh, you believe The Science Mr. Safe and Effective" or whatever. True and false are true and false and I am not going to take a false position just because it is the opposite of NDT's. I've been on an airplane traveling over 500 miles per hour and I can just open a can of seltzer and sip it calmly.
And yes, what Neil is saying is precisely why "the earth does not just fly underneath us when we jump even though it is supposedly traveling 1000 mph." You can dispute the globe if you want, but this particular argument is wrong.
Destin Sandlin impresses me way more than Neil.
Destin covers explanations so effortlessly. With Neil, it's like reading a script.
The easiest way to explain it is via basic physics. Movement in one axis is independent from movement in any other axis.
Yes, but it is actually stronger than that. In addition to having no impact to jumping up and down on an airplane, or walking back and forth across the aisle (which is the same thing relative to the forward motion), there is no impediment to walking forward and backward along the aisle, which is the same axis.
It is not like you are on a plane moving 500 mph and you want to walk 5 mph to the front of the plane and you think to yourself "OK, now I have to remember that I really am accelerating myself to 505 mph." You just start walking forward as if the plane were not moving at all. Obviously, earth with a constant rotation rate is the same thing.
Honestly, I don't really care if people want to think the globe is fake and a conspiracy or whatever. But when they make arguments that are just mechanically wrong, I'm like, no that is just wrong. And since I think the "Believe The Science" crowd like Neil Tyson are definitely not what we want to promote, then we don't want to be in a position where we are very wrong and they are very right about something very obvious.
This whole "shape of the earth" thing is just one of those things. It is the most obvious one. If there were a good argument against the globe, people would not be saying that a rotating earth would move under a hovering helicopter or whatever. If there were a good argument, we would have already heard it.
In the same axis follows Newton's first. You're providing a force relative to your frame.