Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

 JREF Forum The Math of why birds don't collide?
 User Name Remember Me? Password

 Notices Advertisement

 Welcome to the JREF Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

 25th August 2008, 07:06 PM #1 Gene L Critical Thinker   Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 337 The Math of why birds don't collide? That's the question. I'm sure there is a formula, just as there is a formula for why bullets fired in a rain storm don't hit individual rain drops. (Don't ask me, I just know one exists. Something to do with both occupying the same space at the same time.) Anyway, you see birds, which are pretty mysterious creatures, in a flock, all seeming to swerve at the same time. I've never seen a slo-mo of this, but they all seem to go the same way, with no one in particular in charge. I wonderd why they don't run into each other. Track and field runners, essentially going the same way, run into each other when competing. Birds asumptively aren't competing, but still, in HUGE flocks, they all seem to veer the same way at the same time. Again, slo-mo films might reveal 1/10000 second difference (metric seconds, of course ) in their wing movement. And it's a matter of occupying the same space at the same time, like a bullet in a rainstorm, but where missing is guided by intellegence and decision, if you can call a bird intelligent. You would think that a bird occasionally makes a wrong decision in the crowded skies, but apparently not. Maybe this is a water-cooler topic with some, but I've never seen it addressed. Any ideas?
25th August 2008, 08:56 PM   #2
Brian-M
Daydreamer

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Downunder
Posts: 5,862
Quote:
That's the question. I'm sure there is a formula, just as there is a formula for why bullets fired in a rain storm don't hit individual rain drops. (Don't ask me, I just know one exists. Something to do with both occupying the same space at the same time.)
Somehow, I suspect this formula is
 Edited by tim: Please don't try to bypass the autocensor.
. Do you have a link to more info?

(I don't know if there are any formulas about flocks of birds, of schools of fish, but their behavior would be determined by instincts. You might need a different formula for each different species.)

Last edited by tim; 25th August 2008 at 10:55 PM.

 25th August 2008, 09:03 PM #3 AntiTelharsic Critical Thinker   Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 252
 25th August 2008, 09:35 PM #4 tsig a carbon based life-form     Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 31,832 Originally Posted by Gene L That's the question. I'm sure there is a formula, just as there is a formula for why bullets fired in a rain storm don't hit individual rain drops. (Don't ask me, I just know one exists. Something to do with both occupying the same space at the same time.) Anyway, you see birds, which are pretty mysterious creatures, in a flock, all seeming to swerve at the same time. I've never seen a slo-mo of this, but they all seem to go the same way, with no one in particular in charge. I wonderd why they don't run into each other. Track and field runners, essentially going the same way, run into each other when competing. Birds asumptively aren't competing, but still, in HUGE flocks, they all seem to veer the same way at the same time. Again, slo-mo films might reveal 1/10000 second difference (metric seconds, of course ) in their wing movement. And it's a matter of occupying the same space at the same time, like a bullet in a rainstorm, but where missing is guided by intellegence and decision, if you can call a bird intelligent. You would think that a bird occasionally makes a wrong decision in the crowded skies, but apparently not. Maybe this is a water-cooler topic with some, but I've never seen it addressed. Any ideas? When Birds Collide. Last edited by tsig; 25th August 2008 at 09:36 PM. Reason: change entire meaning
 25th August 2008, 09:36 PM #5 Amapola Pirate     Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Mora, New Mexico Posts: 8,260 Umm... I think animals don't usually run into each other because they are paying close attention to tiny clues such as air or water currents, eye movements of flock mates and so on. They do occasionally collide. But I don't think it has anything to do with math.
 25th August 2008, 10:11 PM #6 Aepervius Philosopher     Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Bierland. I mean , germany. Posts: 9,085 Quote: there is a formula for why bullets fired in a rain storm don't hit individual rain drops. Considering the speed of rain, and the speed of the bullet , considering rain as an ideally constant repartition of water sphere in a volume, and considering the density of water in a rain storm, we can consider the bullet travelling a path described by a volume, and the relative speed make it so at first approximation all water sphere are fix in space. That would mean that there is a non zero probability that the bullet will have a few rain drop on its path. The question is , do the shockwave before the bullet push away the raindrops before it hits the bullet ? __________________ Omnes Blessant Ultima necat "I want, and this is my last and most dear wish, I want that the last of the king be strangled with the guts of the last priest" (Jean Meslier / 1664-1729 / Testament) A very early french atheist, a catholic priest in life.
 25th August 2008, 10:31 PM #7 DevilsAdvocate Illuminator     Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 3,792 Originally Posted by Gene L I wonderd why they don't run into each other. Track and field runners, essentially going the same way, run into each other when competing. Track and field runners are confined to a certain space and are jockeying for position. Birds in a flock are not confined. The bigger the flock, the larger the space they take up. In a big flock flight there always seems to be considerable distance between birds so that they won’t collide. They simply spread out far enough from each other to have enough room. They don’t all change courses immediately. Some change course in reaction to an event. Others follow suit. It takes some time, but birds are pretty fast and one bird will be about as fast as the next bird. I think schools of fish move much faster. __________________ Heaven forbid someone reads these words and claims to be adversely affected by them, thus ensuring a barrage of lawsuits filed under the guise of protecting the unknowing victims who were stupid enough to read this and believe it! - Kevin Trudeau
 25th August 2008, 10:34 PM #8 DevilsAdvocate Illuminator     Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 3,792 Originally Posted by AntiTelharsic That's very cool! __________________ Heaven forbid someone reads these words and claims to be adversely affected by them, thus ensuring a barrage of lawsuits filed under the guise of protecting the unknowing victims who were stupid enough to read this and believe it! - Kevin Trudeau
 26th August 2008, 12:39 AM #9 Jonnyclueless Philosopher   Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 5,543
 26th August 2008, 12:48 AM #10 rjh01 Gentleman of leisure Tagger     Join Date: May 2005 Location: Flying around in the sky Posts: 19,135 With bullets it has a lot to do with weight. A bullet has a far bigger weight than a rain drop. So if a bullet came near a rain drop the bullet will not be deflected much. A very small gun (air pistol?) may have a bullet that is lighter than a rain drop. However the probability that it will come near a rain drop is very low. Edit. One of the above links does not work. Here is the right link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flocking_(behavior) Last edited by rjh01; 26th August 2008 at 12:50 AM.
 26th August 2008, 01:10 AM #11 shadron Philosopher     Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Colorado Posts: 5,848 Don't know about birds (or fish, for that matter), but the bullets in rain is simple. The bullet collides with them. The bullet is traveling faster than sound, so the raindrop isn't affected until it is rammed by the air being physically pushed out of the way by the bullet. The turbulence shatters the droplet and supplies heat enough to vaporize most of it. In it's small way, the raindrop absorbs some of the bullet's energy and slows it down with its demise. At long range, rain probably has a considerable cumulative effect.
 26th August 2008, 05:03 AM #12 Worm Graduate Poster     Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Coldstream, Scotland Posts: 1,086 and that's why in the rain scene at the end of Lethal Weapon, both Martin Riggs and Sgt Murtagh had to shoot the baddy - one bullet just wouldn't have been enough.* *Not necessarily true. __________________ "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent" Isaac Asimov Not all cults are bad - I've joined a cult of niceness
 26th August 2008, 05:13 AM #13 leon_heller Graduate Poster     Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: St. Leonards-on-Sea, E. Sussex, UK. Posts: 1,103 Birds in a flock and fish in a shoal only need to keep tabs on their nearest neighbours. It's actually quite a simple strategy. Leon __________________ Leon Heller G1HSM
 26th August 2008, 06:16 AM #14 Gene L Critical Thinker   Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 337 Originally Posted by shadron Don't know about birds (or fish, for that matter), but the bullets in rain is simple. The bullet collides with them. The bullet is traveling faster than sound, so the raindrop isn't affected until it is rammed by the air being physically pushed out of the way by the bullet. The turbulence shatters the droplet and supplies heat enough to vaporize most of it. In it's small way, the raindrop absorbs some of the bullet's energy and slows it down with its demise. At long range, rain probably has a considerable cumulative effect. No, a bullet and a raindrop don't collide. A raindrop is pretty heavy, considering, and would explode a bullet traveling at high speed at most, or divert it severely at least. As I said earlier, there is a formula to explain why they don't collide, but I don't have it. As I recall, it has to do with the time a bullet is in the space that a raindrop is in, and the amount of raindrops in a that space at the same time, which is very, very small. It may be possible, but the odds are against it. The size of a group of, say, 5 shots in rain will be the same as in clear weather. If one or two bullets hit a raindrop, the group would be widely and randomly dispereed, and that's not what happens. What does happen with shooting groups in rain is the air is saturated with water (moisture, not raindrops) which makes it more dense. The bullets go low, but in the same size group as in dry weather.
 26th August 2008, 06:18 AM #15 Gene L Critical Thinker   Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 337 Originally Posted by leon_heller Birds in a flock and fish in a shoal only need to keep tabs on their nearest neighbours. It's actually quite a simple strategy. Leon Humans collide. You see it in track events, fairly often. You see it on crowded streets as well. The differnce, I think, is birds and fish have 3 dimensions to avoid running in to other birds and fish, humans only have two. Last edited by Gene L; 26th August 2008 at 06:19 AM.
 26th August 2008, 06:22 AM #16 Doubt Philosopher     Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 5,778 Originally Posted by Gene L No, a bullet and a raindrop don't collide. A raindrop is pretty heavy, considering, and would explode a bullet traveling at high speed at most, or divert it severely at least. As I said earlier, there is a formula to explain why they don't collide, but I don't have it. As I recall, it has to do with the time a bullet is in the space that a raindrop is in, and the amount of raindrops in a that space at the same time, which is very, very small. It may be possible, but the odds are against it. The size of a group of, say, 5 shots in rain will be the same as in clear weather. If one or two bullets hit a raindrop, the group would be widely and randomly dispereed, and that's not what happens. What does happen with shooting groups in rain is the air is saturated with water (moisture, not raindrops) which makes it more dense. The bullets go low, but in the same size group as in dry weather. And your source for this info is? __________________ Doubt world tour locations: Sulmona, Italy. April 1st to April 13th.
 26th August 2008, 06:35 AM #17 Rob Lister Suspended   Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Virginia Beach, VA Posts: 8,523 Originally Posted by Doubt And your source for this info is? Is that just a nice way of saying, "Pfffft." If so, I ditto. I want to see the "formula" for why a bullet won't hit a raindrop. If I don't, I'm going to say, "Pfffft" outright.
 26th August 2008, 06:40 AM #18 quarky Banned   Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 20,454 If you need to drive ten miles in a rainstorm, you will collide with less rain if you drive faster. (officer)
 26th August 2008, 06:43 AM #19 Doubt Philosopher     Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 5,778 Originally Posted by Rob Lister Is that just a nice way of saying, "Pfffft." If so, I ditto. I want to see the "formula" for why a bullet won't hit a raindrop. If I don't, I'm going to say, "Pfffft" outright. Nope. Pfffft would happen if there is no info to back up the claim. __________________ Doubt world tour locations: Sulmona, Italy. April 1st to April 13th.
 26th August 2008, 06:47 AM #20 Rob Lister Suspended   Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Virginia Beach, VA Posts: 8,523 Originally Posted by quarky If you need to drive ten miles in a rainstorm, you will collide with less rain if you drive faster. (officer) mythbusters did a show on this. I forgot the conclusion, but I think it was you would get "less" wet. that is not to say you wouldn't get wet. I think a bullet would have the same result.
 26th August 2008, 06:48 AM #21 Rob Lister Suspended   Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Virginia Beach, VA Posts: 8,523 Originally Posted by Doubt Nope. Pfffft would happen if there is no info to back up the claim. Well, so far....how much has been presented?
 26th August 2008, 07:06 AM #22 leon_heller Graduate Poster     Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: St. Leonards-on-Sea, E. Sussex, UK. Posts: 1,103 I remember seeing an investigation on TV into whether it was best to run or walk through rain. I think that one got less wet if one walked, but I'm not certain. My mother always maintained that it was best to dart about at random to avoid raindrops, but I'm quite sure that was wrong. Leon __________________ Leon Heller G1HSM Last edited by leon_heller; 26th August 2008 at 07:09 AM.
 26th August 2008, 07:15 AM #23 Delvo Illuminator     Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Posts: 4,665 Originally Posted by Gene L Anyway, you see birds, which are pretty mysterious creatures, in a flock, all seeming to swerve at the same time. There's the problem. They don't swerve simultaneously. One swerves and then others nearby react by swerving, then others near them do so, then others near them do so. The swerving action spreads across the flock like a wave. (And it can be seen with just your eyes; no slow-motion camera needed.)
 26th August 2008, 07:19 AM #24 Ocelot Illuminator     Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: London Posts: 3,157
 26th August 2008, 07:35 AM #25 Doubt Philosopher     Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 5,778 Originally Posted by Ocelot I found that discussion too. But still no sources for the info. Vaporization sounds plausible, but there are many kinds of bullets and guns and powder loads. Add in air resistance and you get a wide variety of velocities for bullets. I doubt there is a single, simple answer for what happens when bullet meets water droplet. __________________ Doubt world tour locations: Sulmona, Italy. April 1st to April 13th.
 26th August 2008, 07:58 AM #26 GreyICE Guest   Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 7,173 Originally Posted by Aepervius Considering the speed of rain, and the speed of the bullet , considering rain as an ideally constant repartition of water sphere in a volume, and considering the density of water in a rain storm, we can consider the bullet travelling a path described by a volume, and the relative speed make it so at first approximation all water sphere are fix in space. That would mean that there is a non zero probability that the bullet will have a few rain drop on its path. The question is , do the shockwave before the bullet push away the raindrops before it hits the bullet ? Of course not. The bullet is travelling faster than the speed of sound. The shockwaves, obviously, aren't. The bullet hits the raindrops.
 26th August 2008, 08:05 AM #27 Gene L Critical Thinker   Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 337 Originally Posted by Doubt And your source for this info is? I'm glad you asked this, since it allows me to restate that I don't have the formula. I will continue to look, however. But for the rest of it, the source is personal experience, and training as a LEO sniper at the Army Marksmanship Training Unit. The course was two weeks, and it was called the PC "Counter-Sniper Instructor's Training." They made a point that bullets don't hit raindrops. I'm not sure if they gave the formula, but gave a synopsis of why. I've read the raindrops/bullet thing several times and seen reference to the formula, but wouldn't be able to repeat it even if I saw it. I believe it from shooting rifles, and sure enough of the claim that I would be willing to bet you couldn't hit a falling raindrop with a bullet on demand. Basically, relying on memory, the idea is to think of 1 bullet and one raindrop, both falling at the speed of gravity, with the bullet also moving at a forward velocity, and the infintesimally small time each is exposed to the other. For them to hit, they would both have to occupy the same space in that small time, and it ain't likely. As for shooting groups in damp air, I know from experience that the groups shoot lower, since resistance is greater. A headwind will also make bullets hit lower, more air over the bullet (decreased velocity.) In dry air, groups will rise a bit becuse there's less friction. Groups at higher elevations, where the air is thinner, will rise a bit over sea-level groups. This is pretty well known among benchrest shooters. None the less, group size remains pretty much the same, impact just changes a bit. Last edited by Gene L; 26th August 2008 at 08:12 AM.
 26th August 2008, 08:24 AM #28 Doubt Philosopher     Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 5,778 Originally Posted by Gene L I'm glad you asked this, since it allows me to restate that I don't have the formula. I will continue to look, however. But for the rest of it, the source is personal experience, and training as a LEO sniper at the Army Marksmanship Training Unit. The course was two weeks, and it was called the PC "Counter-Sniper Instructor's Training." They made a point that bullets don't hit raindrops. I'm not sure if they gave the formula, but gave a synopsis of why. I've read the raindrops/bullet thing several times and seen reference to the formula, but wouldn't be able to repeat it even if I saw it. I believe it from shooting rifles, and sure enough of the claim that I would be willing to bet you couldn't hit a falling raindrop with a bullet on demand. I can see where the probability of striking a rain drop may be low. But that is like saying nobody ever wins the lottery because the odds are so low. Having been through a few military training courses, I do know they don't always have their facts straight. Last time I looked at it the land navigation manual it still said the reason the North Pole existed was that their were large iron deposits in Northern Canada. __________________ Doubt world tour locations: Sulmona, Italy. April 1st to April 13th.
 26th August 2008, 08:25 AM #29 Ocelot Illuminator     Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: London Posts: 3,157 Originally Posted by Gene L Basically, relying on memory, the idea is to think of 1 bullet and one raindrop, both falling at the speed of gravity, with the bullet also moving at a forward velocity, and the infintesimally small time each is exposed to the other. For them to hit, they would both have to occupy the same space in that small time, and it ain't likely. That simply makes it unlikley that a bullets would interact with a particular raindrop, not impossible. Multiply that probability by the number of raindrops and the the liklihood increases. Essentially it is the liklihood of a raindrop being on the bullet's path at the time of firing. In heavy rain that seems quite likely indeed. The question then becomes what happens when raindrop and bullet do interact. Does the pressure wave push the raindrop out of the way? Is the raindrop splattered with little effect on the bullet? Does the bullet explode? Well I can answer that last one. Bullets do not explode when they hit water. In fact firing bullets into a hydroballistics tank is an everyday mundane experience for some.
 26th August 2008, 08:30 AM #30 Cuddles Decoy Moderator     Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: A magical land full of pink fluffy sheeps and bunnies Posts: 17,915 Originally Posted by Gene L the idea is to think of 1 bullet and one raindrop, both falling at the speed of gravity Speed of gravity? Quote: with the bullet also moving at a forward velocity, and the infintesimally small time each is exposed to the other. For them to hit, they would both have to occupy the same space in that small time, and it ain't likely. Saying that any particular bullet is unlikely to hit a raindrop is not the same thing as saying that bullets simply don't hit raindrops. The former may be true, the latter certainly isn't. __________________ If I let myself get hung up on only doing things that had any actual chance of success, I'd never do anything!
 26th August 2008, 09:04 AM #31 GreyICE Guest   Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 7,173 Originally Posted by Ocelot That simply makes it unlikley that a bullets would interact with a particular raindrop, not impossible. Multiply that probability by the number of raindrops and the the liklihood increases. Essentially it is the liklihood of a raindrop being on the bullet's path at the time of firing. In heavy rain that seems quite likely indeed. The question then becomes what happens when raindrop and bullet do interact. Does the pressure wave push the raindrop out of the way? Is the raindrop splattered with little effect on the bullet? Does the bullet explode? Well I can answer that last one. Bullets do not explode when they hit water. In fact firing bullets into a hydroballistics tank is an everyday mundane experience for some. The pressure wave cannot build up in front of the bullet because the bullet is moving faster than the speed of sound. Pressure waves preceding a moving object (like a car or train) is a sub-sonic phenomena. There is no pressure wave in front of a super sonic object. This is extremely obvious. I wish people would stop saying it exists.
 26th August 2008, 09:15 AM #32 AndyD Muse   Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 527 I saw a short documentary years ago which included a POV of a fly on a breakfast table. The argument was that the fly thinks much, much faster than we do so, to it, we are moving in slow motion. Because of this, the fly escaped when someone tried to swat it with a newspaper. I think there was a general correlation between metabolism, lifespan and the speed of thought. If any of this still holds water (or ever did) then perhaps the same principle applies to birds (ever tried to catch one?). This might also explain why two birds can chase each other through the branches of a tree, seemingly without hitting a twig. Maybe, to them, it's really not that amazing? __________________ Australian Vaccination Network (AVN) Perth homeopaths
 26th August 2008, 09:27 AM #33 Vorticity Fluid Mechanic     Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Los Alamos, NM Posts: 2,682 It's relatively straightforward to figure out whether a bullet in a rainstorm will strike a raindrop during its flight by calculating the mean free path of the bullet between successive collisions with raindrops. Let's do it: Assuming a uniform number density of spherical raindrops in the space through which the bullet is flying, the bullet's mean free path will be*: $ \lambda = \frac{1}{\sigma\, n}\, ,$ where $\sigma = \pi {(R_b + R_r)}^2$ is the cross section of bullet-raindrop collisions, $R_b$ is the bullet's radius, $R_r$ is the average raindrop radius, and $n$ is the average number of raindrops per unit volume in the rain storm. Let's find some typical rough numbers for these quantities, to get an idea of the order-of-magnitude of $\lambda$: Suppose, for example, that we are using a 9mm bullet. Then $R_b \approx 4.5\times {10}^{-3}\, \text{meters}$. This PowerPoint presentation I found at the University of Illinois website mentions a distribution of 1000 1-mm raindrops per cubic meter. Supposing this is roughly typical, we then have: $R_r \approx 0.5\times {10}^{-3}\, \text{meters}$ and $n \approx 1000\, {\text{m}}^{-3}$. Plugging these numbers into the formula above for the mean free path yields: $\lambda \approx 12\, \text{meters}$. Thus: 12 meters (on average) between bullet-raindrop collisions. Of course, the numbers I used were rough, so this may be off by a factor of 2 or 3 or whatever, but it does seem to suggest that a bullet will probably strike a handful of raindrops on its journey, unless you are shooting at a target only a few meters away. *: This expression can be derived by considering the cylinder swept out by the combined bullet-raindrop radius moving a distance x. The number of raindrops in this cylinder is distributed according to the Poisson distribution. By looking at the probability that the bullet will have NOT hit a raindrop after a distance x, you can get this expression for the average distance between collisions. (I've left out most of the steps, but it's straightforward.) By the way: The fact that the rain is falling makes little to no difference to this expression, since the bullet's speed and the raindrop's falling speed are so different. __________________ Free lunch. Final wisdom. Total coverage. http://stopsylvia.com
 26th August 2008, 09:57 AM #34 leon_heller Graduate Poster     Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: St. Leonards-on-Sea, E. Sussex, UK. Posts: 1,103 Originally Posted by AndyD I saw a short documentary years ago which included a POV of a fly on a breakfast table. The argument was that the fly thinks much, much faster than we do so, to it, we are moving in slow motion. Because of this, the fly escaped when someone tried to swat it with a newspaper. I think there was a general correlation between metabolism, lifespan and the speed of thought. I always thought it was because flies detect the air movement caused by the newspaper long before it gets anywhere near them. Leon __________________ Leon Heller G1HSM
 26th August 2008, 10:02 AM #35 JoeTheJuggler Penultimate Amazing     Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: St. Louis Posts: 27,765 Originally Posted by Gene L No, a bullet and a raindrop don't collide. A raindrop is pretty heavy, considering, and would explode a bullet traveling at high speed at most, or divert it severely at least. As I said earlier, there is a formula to explain why they don't collide, but I don't have it. As I recall, it has to do with the time a bullet is in the space that a raindrop is in, and the amount of raindrops in a that space at the same time, which is very, very small. It may be possible, but the odds are against it. The size of a group of, say, 5 shots in rain will be the same as in clear weather. If one or two bullets hit a raindrop, the group would be widely and randomly dispereed, and that's not what happens. Sorry, but I don't buy this explanation at all. As someone else pointed out, compared to a bullet, you could consider the falling drops of rain to be holding still. At any moment, in a nearly straight line (actually a segment of a very large parabola), there are bound to be rain drops in the line of fire. The question is what happens when they hit. The energy is the mass and the velocity. A bullet has a lot*. Raindrops have very little. The effect of the raindrop on the bullet is pretty small (probably negligible in most cases). There would probably be a noticeable effect in heavy rain at a greater distance (hitting more drops). On the other hand, when shooting greater distances, I imagine people usually use a higher-powered gun (bigger bullets fired at a higher velocity, I guess?). *This is why a bullet, even with relatively little mass can be fatal but killing someone with one blow of a 2 x 4 is pretty difficult. Better yet, killing someone by throwing a 2 x 4 at them from any distance is darn near impossible. __________________ "That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons
 26th August 2008, 10:21 AM #36 GreyICE Guest   Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 7,173 Joe - two by fours tend to have a ton of kinetic energy, probably at least the same as a bullet. They don't kill because they apply their force over a larger surface. As an example, knives and kevlar. Kevlar isn't great at stopping the force of the knife (especially if you put your body weight behind it).
 26th August 2008, 10:29 AM #37 shadron Philosopher     Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Colorado Posts: 5,848 Originally Posted by GreyICE The pressure wave cannot build up in front of the bullet because the bullet is moving faster than the speed of sound. Pressure waves preceding a moving object (like a car or train) is a sub-sonic phenomena. There is no pressure wave in front of a super sonic object. This is extremely obvious. I wish people would stop saying it exists. Yes you are absolutely right. What you do have is a thin layer of air molecules that are being physically compressed by the bullet or by other molecules being pressed out of the way as it is making its way through them. They cannot extend that compression outward to the front but they do extend their disturbed behavior to the side at the speed of sound, creating the wakes of sound that appear to trail the object. At or above the speed of sound one cannot propagate energy by compression, shear or transverse wave phenomena traveling through the medium, but that certainly doesn't mean you cannot accelerate particles of that medium as high as you need to (in fact, supersonically) in order to move them out of the way.
 26th August 2008, 10:30 AM #38 Rob Lister Suspended   Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Virginia Beach, VA Posts: 8,523 Ok. Back to the theory that birds don't collide. I don't buy it but failing me finding a video of birds colliding, I certainly can't prove it. I suspect they collide as often as cars on I-95. Not often, but it happens...and with less litigious results. Opps! guess what...they do. http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/750719/ all of somebody's base are belong to us. erm...no lawsuit is pending, so far as I know. Last edited by Rob Lister; 26th August 2008 at 10:44 AM.
 26th August 2008, 10:50 AM #39 GreyICE Guest   Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 7,173 Originally Posted by shadron Yes you are absolutely right. What you do have is a thin layer of air molecules that are being physically compressed by the bullet or by other molecules being pressed out of the way as it is making its way through them. They cannot extend that compression outward to the front but they do extend their disturbed behavior to the side at the speed of sound, creating the wakes of sound that appear to trail the object. At or above the speed of sound one cannot propagate energy by compression, shear or transverse wave phenomena traveling through the medium, but that certainly doesn't mean you cannot accelerate particles of that medium as high as you need to (in fact, supersonically) in order to move them out of the way. Certainly true, but saying a layer a few molecules thick could possibly deflect anything is absurd. It's certainly nothing like the large and powerful pressure fronts that build up in front of near-sonic objects. Those 'wakes' are in fact the shockwaves mentioned earlier, which is why shockwaves never deflect anything from the projectile (if they're occurring, the projectile is outrunning them, unless it suddenly goes subsonic).
 26th August 2008, 10:58 AM #40 Rob Lister Suspended   Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Virginia Beach, VA Posts: 8,523 Originally Posted by GreyICE Certainly true, but saying a layer a few molecules thick could possibly deflect anything is absurd. Stop there and reflect upon your assertion. It is not only NOT absurd, it is a fact beyond refutation. Let's at least be accurate in our debunking.

JREF Forum

 Bookmarks Digg del.icio.us StumbleUpon Google Reddit

 Thread Tools

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off
 Forum Jump User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home JREF Topics     Welcome!     JREF     Million Dollar Challenge         Challenge Applications     Latest Commentary Issues     The Amaz!ng Meeting! and other Skeptical Events         TAM Scholarship Auction Reference     The Repository         Forum Newsletters     Book Reviews     Forum Spotlight General Topics     General Skepticism and The Paranormal     Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology     Education     Economics, Business and Finance     History, Literature, and the Arts     Religion and Philosophy     Conspiracy Theories         9/11 Conspiracy Theories     USA Politics     Non-USA & General Politics     Social Issues & Current Events     Computers and the Internet     Conjuror's Corner Members Only     Forum Community     Humor     Movies, TV, Music, Computer Gaming, and other Entertainment     Puzzles     Sports     Archive         Old TAM Auction Threads

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:11 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2001-2013, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.
 -- JREF ---- The Blues ---- Drab Olive ---- True Blue ---- Aqua ---- Vimto ---- Purple Haze ---- Dull Day ---- Eco ---- Mobile ---- Nobby's classy style -- Default vBulletin Contact Us - James Randi Educational Foundation - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top