🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Dec21.193621.12001@microware.com>, troyf@microware.com (Troy Frericks) writes:
> In article <1992Dec19.192819.1816@adobe.com> pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai) writes:
> >If I were a terrorist, I would drool at the thought of being able to
> >get such wonderful bombs so easily... All you'd have to do is arrange
> >for the vacuum valve to be opened on command or the magnetic bearing
> >to be turned off, etc.
> >
> >BOOM!
> 
> Modern composit materials, when used in a flywheel, will disintegrate
> with such a failuar.  This bomb would be about as wonderful as some
> fiber-glass insulation falling out of your attic.

AARRGGGHHH!

Flame on.

The rampant idiocy on flywheels just continues.  How many ways do people have
to be told about conservation of energy?

Don't contribute to the discussion if you don't know anything and haven't
at least read a few articles in it, for cryin' out loud.  I figure there's
been about 1 post every 4 or 5 hours over the past week or so, on average,
refuting this lunacy about "fluff".

Get it through your thick head - energy is conserved.  A flywheel that can power
a car for 600 miles stores basically the same energy that gasoline to power it
the same distance contains.  Do you know anything about fuel-air bombs?  Do you
realize how big an explosion a few gallons of gas can make, when properly mixed
with air?  Do you realize that a hyper speed flywheel fails in microseconds,
releasing all that energy at once?

You think fluff is harmless?  Let's tie you down and hit you with "fluff"
traveling at several km/s and at a temperature of a few thousand degrees.
Let's see if we can find any teeny parts of you after the impact.

Fluff falling out of an attic, indeed.

I'm really tiring of this nonsense, so while I politely corrected the
first posters in their misconceptions - you get flamed, boy.

> >My opinions are my own.

Good thing - they're pretty damned stupid for anyone else.


--
Richard Stead
Center for Seismic Studies
Arlington, VA
stead@seismo.css.gov