Quote:
|
Originally Posted by loftie
Well I suppose we ARE going to be silly about this then.... Are we?
Name ONE entirely IMMOVABLE object... because as far as I know there is no material in this world that is IMMOVABLE....
because every single object in the world is going to have some sort of flexibility to it....
And if course if we're going to be silly about this... then lets calculate air resistance also, and take in to account how likely that an identical car with identical weight travelling at identical speeds on identical road surfaces are going to have a head on accident...
So instead of Over analyzing the question... Lets be simple and straight forward...
Like I said above... if YOU were driving in a vehicle and hit a stationary object (i'd better not say IMMOVABLE)... for instance - the side of a building... would that be as bad as having a head on accident (for example, driving down the wrong side of a freeway) at 100km/h...
Flappist - the rubber ball scenario is flawed in many ways which I won't go into (friction, air resistance, etc) otherwise if you had the ball bounce off two opposing walls, with your theory the ball would continue bouncing forever.... which it wouldn't....
And again using the 'rubber ball' theory, are you saying that the cars would simply bounce off each other and continue at 100km/h the opposite direction? Of course you aren't....
I'm sure we could go on about this all day long... but lets go to first post and answer the question....???
|
While you were/are at school did you learn to read?
READ what I wrote.
READ the first question.
Ask someone what is meant by a "perfect" rubber ball with regard to demonstrating principles. It means there is no friction or losses of any kind.
You have made a pork chop of yourself loftie, stop digging a deeper hole...