Page 1 of 2
Teen solves 300 year old riddle (ballistics related)
Posted: Mon May 28, 2012 1:25 pm
by TattooedGun
Re: Teen solves 300 year old riddle (ballistics related)
Posted: Mon May 28, 2012 1:35 pm
by ovenpaa
Alternatively
Obvious really...........
Re: Teen solves 300 year old riddle (ballistics related)
Posted: Mon May 28, 2012 1:41 pm
by TattooedGun
its way over my head... I'm sure if I sat down and studied it sequentially I could figure out whats going on... but its pretty spectacular, especially when you read the kid was moved from India and had to learn German as he went along whilst studying, and he's doing German A-levels 2 years ahead of his peers! I can barely apply myself enough to get out of bed on a morning and theres people doing this kinda stuff out there :(
*depressed now!* :-p
Re: Teen solves 300 year old riddle (ballistics related)
Posted: Mon May 28, 2012 5:54 pm
by John25
Of course!
Where E = elevation
W = wind
G = wild guess
T = trigger time
C = Common sense
S = skill level
L = luck
e +(w/g)-(t*s)/(c *L10) = V
Simples!
:lol:
Re: Teen solves 300 year old riddle (ballistics related)
Posted: Mon May 28, 2012 6:00 pm
by ovenpaa
Surely that should be L*10 squared?
Re: Teen solves 300 year old riddle (ballistics related)
Posted: Mon May 28, 2012 6:07 pm
by John25
I couldn't do superscript, it was meant to be L to the power of ten!
Re: Teen solves 300 year old riddle (ballistics related)
Posted: Wed May 30, 2012 12:41 am
by Chuck
:lol: My brain hurts...can someone REALLY make that equation work...LOL
Re: Teen solves 300 year old riddle (ballistics related)
Posted: Wed May 30, 2012 8:13 am
by TattooedGun
I could probably write a calculator in vbscript/asp and have it work if you put the variables in... might take a while though!
Re: Teen solves 300 year old riddle (ballistics related)
Posted: Wed May 30, 2012 8:25 am
by spud
if u2-v2.7568 - u2 @1/2 *v3/3.281 to the power of 3 = 1 then the flux capacater would have worked
such a simple mistake to make really
Re: Teen solves 300 year old riddle (ballistics related)
Posted: Wed May 30, 2012 3:39 pm
by John25
spud wrote:if u2-v2.7568 - u2 @1/2 *v3/3.281 to the power of 3 = 1 then the flux capacater would have worked
such a simple mistake to make really
Damnation, I should have known that, but, on the other hand I had forgotten that, Instantaneous Velocity can be defined as The Power that gave an objects its motion divided by the force at that particular instance.
Basically the equation for velocity of a moving mass in a particular direction is as follows;
V = D / T
Where V is velocity
D is Displacement distance traveled
T is the time period it took in the motion of the displacement during travel.
Time by definition is non linear .And Because of the non linearity of Time ,it cannot be measured instantaneously.
That means as soon as a measurement is taken the position of the mass has changed.
Therefore is is not possible to determine position and time at the same instance.
This is what the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle infers,
Consequently We can only measure average:Thus instantaneous velocity can only be calculated as a function of the Power that gave motion to an body.
If the motion of a body is in more than one direction at the same time then the Powers that gave the motion in those directions would have to be added vectorially.
So in order to achieve V, all variables must be reduced to a minimum in order to produce the optimum result.
:cheers:
