View Poll Results: would it be posible create torque with a force without an arm?

Voters
2. You may not vote on this poll
  • yes

    0 0%
  • no

    0 0%
  • dont know

    0 0%
  • plz raaaid stop it

    2 100.00%
  1. #1
    raaaid's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    6,342
    according the physics i study for exams torque is always the vectorial product of arm and force

    but according the physics i study by myself here you have a torque with a force without an arm


    Share this post

  2. #2
    raaaid's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    6,342
    the left cable is wrapped without depth while the right one with a lot of depth

    then theres a ring weight not tight to the cable but that slides in it

    basically the ring weight pulls the same on both cables but one has no multiplication while the other has a lot, and the caught is that it has multiplication without varying the radius

    so i dont know how but gravity should take the weight down by creating a torque though theres no arm
    Share this post

  3. #3
    DuxCorvan's Avatar Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    5,968
    Originally posted by raaaid:
    according the physics i study for exams torque is always the vectorial product of arm and force
    TRANSLATION:

    "According to real Physics I should study for exams, I, in a simplistic way, interpret that torque is always the vectorial product of an arm and a force."

    but according the physics i study by myself here you have a torque with a force without an arm



    TRANSLATION:

    "But according to Physics of my fancy and invention, which I take off my a$s on a daily basis, here you have a torque with a force without an arm."

    (Here goes some indecipherable drawing that looks one of those things you do in ten seconds when you try to draw "advisable" in a Pictionary game.)
    Share this post

  4. #4
    Wildnoob's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,615
    Originally posted by DuxCorvan:
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by raaaid:
    according the physics i study for exams torque is always the vectorial product of arm and force
    TRANSLATION:

    "According to real Physics I should study for exams, I, in a simplistic way, interpret that torque is always the vectorial product of an arm and a force."

    but according the physics i study by myself here you have a torque with a force without an arm



    TRANSLATION:

    "But according to Physics of my fancy and invention, which I take off my a$s on a daily basis, here you have a torque with a force without an arm."

    (Here goes some indecipherable drawing that looks one of those things you do in ten seconds when you try to draw "advisable" in a Pictionary game.) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Incredible Dux, how did you learn to translate raaaid's posts?
    Share this post

  5. #5
    TinyTim's Avatar Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,781
    Originally posted by DuxCorvan:
    (Here goes some indecipherable drawing that looks one of those things you do in ten seconds when you try to draw "advisable" in a Pictionary game.)


    Share this post

  6. #6
    Originally posted by Wildnoob:
    Incredible Dux, how did you learn to translate raaaid's posts?
    Identical Spanish twins have that 7th sense....



    ....and a talcum powder fetish.

    Share this post

  7. #7
    Share this post

  8. #8
    raaaid's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    6,342
    well i did yesterday the experiment at 6 am and the answer is theres no torque

    in fact is pretty stablished that torque equals arm and force, no way around this

    so to build a box that holds on a corner an inverted pendulum i need to rewrite mechanics

    well the wolrd is a dream after all i think i can do it

    i think i just need to put rails to this pulley

    i did the experiment with plastiline and pencils and with rails the multiplication of the pulley seems unlimited

    though the more multiplication also implies a slight growth of the arm i hope not they are not in proportion

    i think this last point is a matter of believing

    as i believe god is not cruel so in my universe is not, i believe he allows multiplication of a pulley without having to grow the raidus proportianlly
    Share this post

  9. #9
    DuxCorvan's Avatar Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    5,968
    Originally posted by raaaid:
    well i did yesterday the experiment at 6 am and the answer is theres no torque

    in fact is pretty stablished that torque equals arm and force, no way around this

    so to build a box that holds on a corner an inverted pendulum i need to rewrite mechanics

    well the wolrd is a dream after all i think i can do it

    i think i just need to put rails to this pulley

    i did the experiment with plastiline and pencils and with rails the multiplication of the pulley seems unlimited

    though the more multiplication also implies a slight growth of the arm i hope not they are not in proportion

    i think this last point is a matter of believing

    as i believe god is not cruel so in my universe is not, i believe he allows multiplication of a pulley without having to grow the raidus proportianlly
    TRANSLATION:

    "Well, yesterday, while I was half-asleep, I did the experiment, and, quite surprisingly, the answer is: aw, sh*t there's no torque.

    In fact, I've always known and been said what would happen, but I ignored it, though I knew there was no way around.

    So, to build a box that holds on a corner, this is, an inverted pendulum, I'd need to be a God or live in a fictional world, and rewrite Mechanics, but that won't discourage me.

    Well, the world is a dream after all, so I stubbornly think that I can do it, even if never ever could do any other fictional absurd thing against the laws of nature that I've tried in my whole life.

    I think I just need to put some mysterious things I call "rails" to this pulley, and it still won't do sh*t, but what the heck.

    So I made a grotesque mess with plasticine and pencils and you-know-what, and now Frankenstein's monster lives, ¡he lives!

    Though so much multiplication, implies also a small erection of the arm, and I hope the ***** is not out of proportion.

    I think this last point is a matter of believing: if you believe elephants fly quite enough, then elephants fly.

    Since I believe God is not cruel, and so, in my flying-elephant-universe he is not, I firmly believe he'll allow something so utterly unrelated to cruelty as pulleys multiplying themselves without having to grow their bellies gruesomely."
    Share this post

  10. #10
    I think the weight produces a force dude, then if the force acts on the arm and it is fixed to some central point then the force is expressed (!?) as torque.

    @Dux Corvan.

    One day some guy defied all the laws of popular science and proved that the world was actually round.
    Share this post