Lukačovičovo Libtard Méidum decided to set a new standard. The scientific editor of the list of messages has decided to tell us that “the faster you are, the less time you save.
In the editorial Mailbox, which we have already disappeared for safety reasons for safety reasons outside the AS list infrastructure, this caused a decent whirlwind. Whether I can write something about it. Well, what to write about it. New era.
A large part of the misunderstanding is the title of the article. Here we managed to create a perfect clickbait in the spirit of Libtard’s propaganda. The article does not stand anywhere that the faster you go, the less time you save. The article is based on juggling with concepts.
The good news is that, despite the liberal editors’ efforts, all relations between the track, speed and time are true. So if you drive from Prague to Pilsen after D5 at an average speed of 100 km/h, which is about 100 km, you will get exactly one hour, because t = s/v. If you drive at an average speed of 200 km/h, it will be in half an hour. Totally simple and everyone understands it.
What Mr. Kasík tried to tell is this.
Mr. Klobouk runs between Prague and Pilsen at an average speed of 50 km/h. One day Mr. Hat decides to accelerate by driving at an average speed of 75 km/h, ie 50% and 25 km/h faster. Mr. Klobouk had drove two hours before, and now it will run for an hour and twenty minutes, exactly 40 minutes and 50% less.
Mr. Diarrha rides from Prague to Pilsen at an average speed of 100 km/ha, decides to accelerate the same average 25 km/h as Mr. Klobouk, ie to 125 km/h, and will be there only 12 minutes and 25% before he was used to. If he wanted to be there 50% earlier as Mr. Hat, he would have to speed up to an average of 150 km/h.
What a surprise. The same absolute part of the double base is relatively half. These are the knowledge of algebra level for elementary school. To transfer it to the reality of Fialostan, when it increases eggs by two crowns, it is a nationwide disaster, because it is a third of their price. When it increases by two crowns, Argentine Rib Eye Steak, no one attracts it and no one wants to start breeding on a block of beefs, although they are the same two crowns. This is truly a scientific “paradox”, a finished charm, just good for the liberal retards for which the news list is written.
I will tell you that the average speed of 100 km/Hz of Prague Stodůlky to the edge of Pilsen was quite a scythe. You are still slowing behind trucks, buses, caravans, Polish vans, Romanian car importers and the like, and each slowing down to 80 km/h pulls the diameter down quickly. This brings us to another aspect of fast driving, that the world does not work with the average. What is behind you is just behind you. You do not have to accept the speed of Mr. Klobouk or the green widow in the SUV cheerfully calling in the left lane, because you will overtake them and do not bother you.
Now the key town, which Mr. Kasík has forgotten to tell. The whole Libtard’s discovery is only intellectual onania, as well as Schrödinger’s cat and all of their causes that inventions invent because they have too much time. Why? The length of human life is given absolutely as the time between birth and death, in units of time, in years, days and hours. It is not given as a multiple of roads from Prague to Pilsen or as a multiple of something that may have been theoretically and did not happen. Therefore, there is no point in speculating how much time someone has saved, because time cannot save, it still flows the same way. All ratio indicators are useless, only the time is calculated, the one from the formula t = s / v. So the choice of Mr. Klobouk and Mr. Protejm, how many minutes of their lives they intend to spend on the way from Prague to Pilsen, and it is secondary to how much a percent of some hypothetical basis.
Another nonsense in the article only hosted:
“Most drivers think they are above average.”
How would I answer the question of which driver do I consider? I wouldn’t answer because it is pointless. The driving of the vehicle is a comprehensive activity involving a number of completely different skills and abilities that are used in different situations. Therefore, it is not so easy to define who the above -average driver is. For example, Magda Geobbels was definitely a great mom because she gave birth and raised six children, so she was officially announced by the imperial mother, but unfortunately they poisoned them all at the end. In some aspects, it was very good, perhaps in terms of quantity, but in others desperately bad. Again, we have the motif of chronic sick intoshos. Instead of thinking about how to decipher the problem into smaller understandable parts, which would, by the way, allow each driver to identify their weaknesses and strengths, operates here with some indefinite term on which they will expose. By the way, this is also very common manipulation.
“The kinetic energy of the vehicle rises not linearly, but quadratically. And therefore the braking distance increases with the second power of speed”.
The first part of the sentence is true. The second not. It’s probably the most widespread superstition. First of all, it is necessary to distinguish the track to stop the vehicle, which is calculated from the moment when a driver appeared in the driver’s field of vision, for which he decided to stop and the braking distance, which counts from the start of braking to stop. The braking distance is part of the stop for stop. The braking distance grows with speed linearly, not exponentially. Here, someone will say how it is possible when kinetic energy grows exponentially, specifically with the other power of speed. How is it possible? This is because the energy of the energy that ensures slowing, ie brakes, also works exponentially. It is due to their principle where one friction element is always connected to the wheel (such as a disc or drum) and the other with a car (such as a brake pad or jaw). As the wheel rotates between these braking elements, the energy changes to heat. In the words of physics, the energy watered is equal to the product of the moment of inertia of the body times the angular speed to the other, and the power above the angular speed is taken with the other power at the speed and therefore the dependence of the braking distance on linear speed, according to the formulas for evenly slowed movement. However, if we are not only considering the braking distance, but the overall stop for stopping, it is necessary to add the track of the vehicle during the driver’s response time, the runway through the brake system and half of the track during the brake effect. If we add this, we get something broken curve. For a scientific editorial office, a list of messages probably a tricky problem, but as Mr. Kasík himself wrote, physics is relentless and who would not seem, Albert Bradáč and team, judicial engineering, page 376 and on.
“We are encountering another non -intuitive calculation, namely air resistance. It rises with the other power of the vehicle’s speed, and it is necessary to spend more and more energy to overcome it. In practice, this means that most cars have an optimal speed somewhere between 80 and 100 km.” (…) Larger cars have an optimum at lower speeds, due to the larger front surface that the flowing air exposes. But even racing cars are losing the fight against air resistance and consumption with speed rises rapidly. ”
I don’t know what is non -intuitive. Anyone who did not scratch in high school, perhaps knows that air resistance = K. in2 . For this reason, cars (aircraft, cyclists…) with increasing speed are grossly inefficient. The brothel does the other power. Similarly, there is a grossly uneconomical car with an internal combustion engine at low speeds, such as 30 km/h, which adorns supporters of transport disposal. This is again due to its drive, or the torque, which is able to produce the combustion engine. This results in somewhere between 80 and 120 km/h is something like an operational optimum, where the sum of both negative effects has a minimum. The one drops and the other will not grow so much. But I am glad that I have read on something as ulhable as a list of news that all the artificial speed reduction is counterproductive, only burdening his unconscious victims.
Do you know what bothers me most about the article?
The terrible intoshock that drips from that text.
I understand that it was necessary to go to the media shitstorm number 1, ie a “quick” ride of a Member of Turk and, using a pseud science, explain to a liberal reader a list of messages that Turk is a total idiot. Those who have stood up to date to consume this appalling pink media separation, he certainly chooses pirates or tent and some Turk is not interested. However, if the purpose of the article was usually not very smart liberal readers about something interesting, it became a way that had to be offended. But it’s actually good.
18.05.2025 D-FENS
Related Articles:
1 169x read
