explain

>>8785073
Do your own homework

And holy shit, have you never ridden a train/tram/car?

>>8785073
>What are Newtons laws in a non-inertial frame

The helicopter would move backwards, not sure if it would hit the back wall though.

>>8785073
When you sit in a train, don't you feel the intertia?
Of course the helicopter doesnt sit still.

>>8785093
Because the seat you're sitting in causes a force on you. Now when the helicopter is hovering in air, there is a very miniature force caused by the air molecules, but all the air starts moving with the train and so does the helicopter. It will gently glide back, not slam into the back wall.

If the helicopter was hovering when the train started it would hit the wall. If the helicopter started after the train started it would stay in motion with the train.

>an object in motion stays in motion until acted upon by outside forces

In the second scenerio it would work, because the helicopter is moving forward with the train as it begins to hover.

You can do the same experiment with a ball. Throw it in the air while running forward, it will "follow" your trajectory.

>>8785097
quality bait

>>8785150
But anon, it wasn't a bait. It was a physical explanation on what happens.

File: image.jpg (24KB, 187x293px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 187x293px

>>8785097

:^)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnXf7EJ8Qvc

What if you launch it after the horizontal velocity brings it to speed with the train and then hover? Will the horizontal speed decrease as it slowly moves to the back?

>>8785073
THE AIR INSIDE OF THE TRAIN MOVES WITH THE TRAIN YOU FUCKING BRAINLET

GTFO MY BOARD

>>8785073
Whether it would slam ijnto the wall depends on how fast the train accelerates. It would move back, though, Stand in the center of a train and don't hold on as it leaves the station, see what happens.

how does the weight of the drone figure into this?

a drone weighing the same weight of air would seem to fly with the train

but a drone weighing 100 pounds would seem to be anchored by the earth

right?

File: iss.jpg (100KB, 640x437px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 640x437px

>>8785684
Not related, train is not accelerating, guy flying the drone, the drone, the air -- everything ins already up to speed.

Interestingly relevent video of acceleration during a repositioning burn on the ISS.

http://server2.vidmax.com/video/146232-Demonstration-of-Acceleration-Inside-the-International-Space-Station-During-a-Reboost

Wouldn't the helicopter align itself to the new direction of gravity (diagonally back and down)? Pretty sure that's what would happen. The helicopter would become tilted, and try to hover in the direction the train is moving. It would experience a greater total gravity than its conventional hovering mode, so it would slowly sink.

>>8785792
Substitute density for weight, and yoiu;d be close. Even the air will tend to drift back towards the back of the train when the train accelerates from the station (imagine a bathtub of water on the train, sloshing about, to get an idea how fluids move on the train. But the air movement would be smaller -- I'm not sure how visible it would be,somebody who lives in a city with a subway maybe take a balloon with you next time you ride the train and shoot us some video.

>>8785805
>fluid sloshy on the train
i get that, you can feel it, thats why you have handrails on trains
i guess what im saying is it's all about inertia and mass.

when the train accelerates you will feel pushed back until your body is acquainted with it's new velocity

But you dont feel lots of air rushing past you

I just tried to type out an explanation for this but it sounded retarded and i deleted it. So,

Why do you feel pushed back but dont feel air rush past you when a train starts?

>>8785824
The air is packed into the totality of the train, and is not very dense -- it does not move much, as it takes less energy to accelerate the less dense air and as the air molecules are close to being in contact with other sir molecules all the way to the back of the train.

There would be slight air movement -- if you had a pressure sensor at the front and rear of the car, you could detect a slight difference as slightly more air was pushed into the back of the car.

>>8785834
>other sir molecules

sir = air

A helicopter is a shit example because it can adjust itself like a human can right?

File: Dzhanibekov_effect.webm (2MB, 854x480px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 854x480px

>>8785797
The instant it changes trajectory that moment you see in the vid is negated.

It stands on air. Therefore it goes where the air goes. Where do you think the air goes inside a train?

>>8785909
I wonder if this effect was predicted before we got to space.

>>8785916
>Trains are airtight.

This question assumes that the helicopter only asserts a downward force so it hits the back of the train.

Maybe if the train accelerates incredibly slowly it would just move back a bit?

>>8785909
Wat?

>>8785929
I'm guessing so, you can do a limited version of it tossing and catching a hammer by the handle. it

>>8785930
Nobody told you they are airtight you strawman using child.

>>8785930
>there's wind in a moving train

Helicopter is heavier than air therefore it will hit the back of the cabin.

>>8785792
A helium balloon would move to the front of the cabin because it is less dense than air.

>>8785073
>>8785792
We can use Newtons second law in an accelerating frame by adding a "fictitious force" to it [eqn] F - mA = - ma [/eqn]Where [math]A ~ \text { and } ~ a [/math] are the acceleration of the frame and of the helicopter respectively. So yes there will be a force pushing it back towards the wall.

>>8785684
>Starts the drone off while the train is moving, therefor Vo of drone == V of train

>>8785947
Tossing objects in the air and catching them having them flip around is where I first discovered it when I was kid int he 80s. It wasn't until that webm someone posted that I found out what it was.

>all those decades of ignorance

I love the internet.

>>8785947
>Wat?

When the quadcopter changes its trajectory all other reference frames for movement are negated.

>>8785909
>video
as far as I'm concerned, this is a bug
this is further evidence that we're living in a simulation
if everything were simulated correctly, this would not happen
it would just continue to spin as expected like it does for the first 1 second of the video

File: wall.jpg (87KB, 488x422px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 488x422px

>>8785073
I've actually tested this, sorta, by hovering a micro quad in a moving car.

As the car accelerated, braked and cornered I had to pitch and bank the quadcopter to keep it in the middle of the car, and if I just kept it level the quad would end up colliding with the seats or windows as the car maneuvered. So yeah, that's the reality. I could explain WHY but I'm gonna let other posters handle that.

>>8785146
>If the helicopter was hovering when the train started it would hit the wall.
Would the helicopter hit the wall, or is the wall hitting the helicopter?

>>8786671
Thats dumb anon, real dumb.

>>8785609
comparatively poor bait

File: wheel.png (145KB, 690x432px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 690x432px

>>8786707
here's another error having to do with rotation I learned in physics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8H98BgRzpOM
this makes no fucking sense, dude

>>8786730
What makes no sense?

>>8786704
"Whether he rock hits the pitcher, or the pitcher hits the rock, it's going to be bad for the pitcher."

--Sancho Panza, "Man of La Mancha"

>>8785097
The air moves "back" with the helicopter, winner.

>>8786730
Rotational force moves perpendicular to the plane of the rotating object, "near" the center most axis.

I don't see how you're confused by this. Where else is the energy supposed to go?

>>8786730
how does that quote for brainlets go?
"Sufficiently advanced technology is basically magic, dont waste time thinking about it, pleb"

>>8786861
So you're saying there's a vacuum at the front of the train then?

>>8786861
No it doesn't. There's no sudden gush of wind when a train moves forward. The air molecules touching the back of the train will be nudged by the train. Those molecules will nudge all of the molecules on front of themselves until all air molecules onboard are moving at the speed of the train. This is the same thing that happens when you accelerate in a car.

>>8785073
what happens if the train accelerates to 99.9999% the speed of light in 60 seconds?

File: boom.jpg (128KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 800x600px

>>8788640

>>8788241
Not the guy you are replying to, but I am saying, and said somewhere upstream of this, that yeah -- if you had some sensitive pressure sensors, you'd detect that the pressure goes up in the back of the train car and drops in the front by a very small amount.

>>8788787
>Having sensitive information

we waz kings n shiet

>>8788787
what if the train was a near pefect vaccum minus like a mole of gas molecules and then it accelerated, would there be a pressure differential then?

>>8788805
It's entirely possible a being outside of realm of perception is controlling our universe

>>8788793
Not even a faint idea what you are trying to say.

>>8788805
Yep. Would be very, very small, because the pressure is very, very small. But mass is going to need to be accelerated up to the new train speed either way.

Your helicopter won't fly, though.

>>8788810
we try to avoid those thoughts becasue the other being can sense them and will fuck your shit up black-liqourish style

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MR3daaWLXI

/thread

>>8788833
>black-liqourish style
???

>>8788867
seems legit I suppose

>>8788868
nobody likes black liqourish duh

theres your normie tip for the day

>>8785097
Stop posting this thread and this reply

>>8785073
More tricky than people here seem to think. Of course it has inertia, but because in this case it's hovering over a nap of air, things could be more complicated.
That said, it will probably move backward, but probably not by much. It's not like the guys in front are asphyxiating.

>>8789342
Meh honestly thinking about it, even if the air was completely stationary (relative to the cabin) while the train is accelerating it would be no different than just blowing on the copter. It would still move backward significantly.

>>8786671
it was screwed into something and the first 1 second of the video is it being unscrewed and released, at which point it shows its new movement

>>8786886
This isn't advanced technology, it's a wheel on a rope.

>>8785073
What would be the difference between staying mid-air and moving with the train?

>>8785929
Yes it's not actually that mystical, it's something proved in every second year analytic mechanics class

File: slow.jpg (148KB, 565x600px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 565x600px

>>8788867
TOO SLOW!

>>8785797