Mythbusters

Ghoulish Delight · 05-06-2010, 04:42 PM

I'm surprised we've never started a thread to discuss. I've tried to go to their message board in the past, but lordy my brain just does not operate on the right wavelength to handle a massively active board like that.

Anyone watch yesterday? Good episode, solid result on the car crash, but (as is often the case) I was left grumbling about how they summed things up and what they missed.

I wish they had done 1 more test case. Namely, one of the cars stationary (but free to move if impacted) and the other at 100MPH. The result should have been approximately the same as the 2 cars colliding at 50MPH each, and would correctly explain why Jamie had the 100MPG figure in his head.

And I'd also point out that, from a total energy in the system perspective, Jamie was not wrong about it being equivalent to 1 car at 100MPH running into a wall. It's just that with 2 cars, that energy is distributed so each absorbs about half, while, because the wall is essentially unmovable, the 100MPH car into a wall absorbs all of the energy.

I think that's an important point considering what the original test case that Jamie was talking about was. It was about crushing a car to flatness between the 2 trucks. And in that setup, yes, the car would have been subjected to approximately as much energy as is created when one runs into a wall at 100MPH.

I was also thinking about what Adam was saying, that he was having a hard time intuitively visualizing WHY the result was what it was. I figured out a good way to imagine the difference. The key mistake Jamie made was that, while combining the two velocities was correct, he replaced the mass of one of the cars with the mass of an immovable wall, thus changing the equation. If you want to picture why that mistake is significant, just picture the original case, with 2 cars coming at each other at 50 MPH...but replace one of the cars with a massive wall that wouldn't slow down on impact. I think we'd all have a pretty instinctive idea of what would happen, and why it's different than 2 cars.

Gemini Cricket · 05-06-2010, 04:58 PM

I totally think you should be on that show.

Moonliner · 05-06-2010, 05:00 PM

Agreed. It's an awesome show. Having a dedicated Mythbusters thread is a very good idea.

Capt Jack · 05-06-2010, 05:02 PM

Ive had more than a few issues with some of their test criteria and conclusions in the past. I totally see where youre coming from in this instance, even though I didnt see the episode. A solid unchanging wall aspect leaves no room for a good % of energy redirection and counteraction due to physical changes to the parties involved during the duration of the event.

in short: I agree

Ghoulish Delight · 05-06-2010, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Capt Jack

A solid unchanging wall aspect leaves no room for a good % of energy redirection and counteraction due to physical changes to the parties involved during the duration of the event.

Which was the conclusion they came to. This episode was about revisiting some stuff from the past that they DID mess up, and they correctly proved that Jamie had previously misspoken earlier. I just think they could have done a more thorough job of explaining and demonstrating exactly what was going on and why he was "wrong" initially.

Quote:

Agreed. It's an awesome show. Having a dedicated Mythbusters thread is a very good idea.

Oh, are we supposed to be counting threads you start as valid threads?

BarTopDancer · 05-06-2010, 05:13 PM

I like it when they blow stuff up and/or participate in Shark Week.

scaeagles · 05-06-2010, 05:27 PM

Mythbusters is some basic science content, quick and dirty methods, but massively entertaining. They are hysterically funny, and as BTD pointed out, they make lots of things explode. Which is fun. Like water heater rockets and cement trucks. It's awesome. They crash rocket sleds into cars. Almost everything they do I would love to participate in.

That's why it's a great show. I don't watch it because of incredible scientific method.

Kevy Baby · 05-06-2010, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Oh, are we supposed to be counting threads you start as valid threads?

Why start now?

Moonliner · 05-06-2010, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

Why start now?

The irony is that the two most enduring threads I started are ones I rarely if ever visit.

Ghoulish Delight · 05-06-2010, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scaeagles

That's why it's a great show. I don't watch it because of incredible scientific method.

Oh, I know they need to cut some corners in the name of expedience and entertainment. I usually don't get too worked up over it. In fact, I'm usually less annoyed by, "You did it wrong!" than I am by, "You explained it wrong!" Explaining it right takes no extra air time or experimentation, or drop in entertainment value. It just takes them doing their homework a little better.

05-06-2010, 04:42 PM	#1
Ghoulish Delight I Floop the Pig Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Alternative Swankstyle Posts: 19,348	Mythbusters I'm surprised we've never started a thread to discuss. I've tried to go to their message board in the past, but lordy my brain just does not operate on the right wavelength to handle a massively active board like that. Anyone watch yesterday? Good episode, solid result on the car crash, but (as is often the case) I was left grumbling about how they summed things up and what they missed. I wish they had done 1 more test case. Namely, one of the cars stationary (but free to move if impacted) and the other at 100MPH. The result should have been approximately the same as the 2 cars colliding at 50MPH each, and would correctly explain why Jamie had the 100MPG figure in his head. And I'd also point out that, from a total energy in the system perspective, Jamie was not wrong about it being equivalent to 1 car at 100MPH running into a wall. It's just that with 2 cars, that energy is distributed so each absorbs about half, while, because the wall is essentially unmovable, the 100MPH car into a wall absorbs all of the energy. I think that's an important point considering what the original test case that Jamie was talking about was. It was about crushing a car to flatness between the 2 trucks. And in that setup, yes, the car would have been subjected to approximately as much energy as is created when one runs into a wall at 100MPH. I was also thinking about what Adam was saying, that he was having a hard time intuitively visualizing WHY the result was what it was. I figured out a good way to imagine the difference. The key mistake Jamie made was that, while combining the two velocities was correct, he replaced the mass of one of the cars with the mass of an immovable wall, thus changing the equation. If you want to picture why that mistake is significant, just picture the original case, with 2 cars coming at each other at 50 MPH...but replace one of the cars with a massive wall that wouldn't slow down on impact. I think we'd all have a pretty instinctive idea of what would happen, and why it's different than 2 cars. __________________ 'He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.' -TJ
	Submit to Quotes

05-06-2010, 04:58 PM	#2
Gemini Cricket ... Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,244	I totally think you should be on that show.
	Submit to Quotes

05-06-2010, 05:00 PM	#3
Moonliner 8/30/14 - Disneyland -10k or Bust. Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 9,022	Agreed. It's an awesome show. Having a dedicated Mythbusters thread is a very good idea. __________________ - Taking it one step at a time.
	Submit to Quotes

05-06-2010, 05:02 PM	#4
Capt Jack check your head Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 4,174	Ive had more than a few issues with some of their test criteria and conclusions in the past. I totally see where youre coming from in this instance, even though I didnt see the episode. A solid unchanging wall aspect leaves no room for a good % of energy redirection and counteraction due to physical changes to the parties involved during the duration of the event. in short: I agree __________________ a clear conscience is a sure sign of a fuzzy memory
	Submit to Quotes

05-06-2010, 05:13 PM	#6
BarTopDancer Prepping... Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Here, there, everywhere Posts: 11,405	I like it when they blow stuff up and/or participate in Shark Week. __________________ Spork is the new MacGyver Postcards From My Edge
	Submit to Quotes

05-06-2010, 05:27 PM	#7
scaeagles I LIKE! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,819	Mythbusters is some basic science content, quick and dirty methods, but massively entertaining. They are hysterically funny, and as BTD pointed out, they make lots of things explode. Which is fun. Like water heater rockets and cement trucks. It's awesome. They crash rocket sleds into cars. Almost everything they do I would love to participate in. That's why it's a great show. I don't watch it because of incredible scientific method.
	Submit to Quotes