dood, there ain't no asymptote no where.

duh.

never let it be said you are concerned with reality, merk.

From: Mark Borgerson
Date: 9/5/2004 7:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

In article ,
says...
mark, that ain't no asymptote.

duh.

Duh! Perhaps you'll re-read the part below and find I never said it
was an asymptote. I said there are inflection points in the
power speed curve. The only asymptote I've mentioned is
the one at c.

Mark Borgerson



From: Mark Borgerson
Date: 9/3/2004 11:36 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

In article ,
says...
Until you get past Mach 1, at least! ;-) after that point,
there are some inflection points in the power/speed curve, IIRC.

no, you don't remember any such thing. unless of course you were stoned
out of
your gourd in your fourth sophomore year in college.


Whoa! You must have me mixed up with someone who went to UC Berkely in
the 60's. My sophomore year was at UC Davis in '65 and we weren't
smoking much grass at all! (although there were probaby a lot of
students figuring out how to optimize the yield---Davis being a
world-class agricultural school) ;-)


As for inflection points, consult the definition at

http://www.math.com/tables/derivatives/extrema.htm

and look at the following crude graphic

*
*
*
*
P *
*
O *
*
W *
*
E
*
R *
*

************************************************* *******************
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

MACH NUMBER


There is an inflection point at about Mach 1. However there is no point
on the graph where you get an increase in speed without an increase in
power.

If you look at the engine data at
http://www.voodoo.cz/hornet/info.html

you will find that the F-18 engines develop about 14,000 pounds thrust
at full military power and 21,000 pounds at full afterburner. Yet
it takes full military power to get to mach 1, but with 50%
more power, you can end up at mach 1.8. Thus the inflection
point just past mach 1. (Like most modern military jets prior to
the F-22, the F-18 cannot sustain supersonic speeds in level flight
without afterburners.)

If you have more detailed power/speed curves for the transonic region,
feel free to post some links to enlighten us.


Mark Borgerson

In article ,
says...
dood, there ain't no asymptote no where.

duh.

never let it be said you are concerned with reality, merk.


In any case, I was apparently more concerned with my English and
typing classes than you.


Mark Borgerson


From: Mark Borgerson
Date: 9/5/2004 7:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

In article ,
says...
mark, that ain't no asymptote.

duh.

Duh! Perhaps you'll re-read the part below and find I never said it
was an asymptote. I said there are inflection points in the
power speed curve. The only asymptote I've mentioned is
the one at c.

Mark Borgerson



From: Mark Borgerson
Date: 9/3/2004 11:36 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

In article ,
says...
Until you get past Mach 1, at least! ;-) after that point,
there are some inflection points in the power/speed curve, IIRC.

no, you don't remember any such thing. unless of course you were stoned
out of
your gourd in your fourth sophomore year in college.


Whoa! You must have me mixed up with someone who went to UC Berkely in
the 60's. My sophomore year was at UC Davis in '65 and we weren't
smoking much grass at all! (although there were probaby a lot of
students figuring out how to optimize the yield---Davis being a
world-class agricultural school) ;-)


As for inflection points, consult the definition at

http://www.math.com/tables/derivatives/extrema.htm

and look at the following crude graphic

*
*
*
*
P *
*
O *
*
W *
*
E
*
R *
*

************************************************* *******************
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

MACH NUMBER


There is an inflection point at about Mach 1. However there is no point
on the graph where you get an increase in speed without an increase in
power.

If you look at the engine data at
http://www.voodoo.cz/hornet/info.html

you will find that the F-18 engines develop about 14,000 pounds thrust
at full military power and 21,000 pounds at full afterburner. Yet
it takes full military power to get to mach 1, but with 50%
more power, you can end up at mach 1.8. Thus the inflection
point just past mach 1. (Like most modern military jets prior to
the F-22, the F-18 cannot sustain supersonic speeds in level flight
without afterburners.)

If you have more detailed power/speed curves for the transonic region,
feel free to post some links to enlighten us.


Mark Borgerson

mark, you said 'asymptote", and none exists. *that* is bad English?

It seems to me more likely that you didn't have a clew what the word meant, and
you used it anyway to "prove" to one and all what a genius you are.

remember, the term entered this thread when some fraud claiming to be a college
professor totally misused the word.

mark, were that fraud?


From: Mark Borgerson
Date: 9/6/2004 1:23 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

In article ,
says...
dood, there ain't no asymptote no where.

duh.

never let it be said you are concerned with reality, merk.


In any case, I was apparently more concerned with my English and
typing classes than you.


Mark Borgerson


From: Mark Borgerson
Date: 9/5/2004 7:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

In article ,
says...
mark, that ain't no asymptote.

duh.

Duh! Perhaps you'll re-read the part below and find I never said it
was an asymptote. I said there are inflection points in the
power speed curve. The only asymptote I've mentioned is
the one at c.

Mark Borgerson



From: Mark Borgerson
Date: 9/3/2004 11:36 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

In article ,
says...
Until you get past Mach 1, at least! ;-) after that point,
there are some inflection points in the power/speed curve, IIRC.

no, you don't remember any such thing. unless of course you were
stoned
out of
your gourd in your fourth sophomore year in college.


Whoa! You must have me mixed up with someone who went to UC Berkely
in
the 60's. My sophomore year was at UC Davis in '65 and we weren't
smoking much grass at all! (although there were probaby a lot of
students figuring out how to optimize the yield---Davis being a
world-class agricultural school) ;-)


As for inflection points, consult the definition at

http://www.math.com/tables/derivatives/extrema.htm

and look at the following crude graphic

*
*
*
*
P *
*
O *
*
W *
*
E
*
R *
*

************************************************* *******************
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

MACH NUMBER


There is an inflection point at about Mach 1. However there is no
point
on the graph where you get an increase in speed without an increase in

power.

If you look at the engine data at
http://www.voodoo.cz/hornet/info.html

you will find that the F-18 engines develop about 14,000 pounds thrust
at full military power and 21,000 pounds at full afterburner. Yet
it takes full military power to get to mach 1, but with 50%
more power, you can end up at mach 1.8. Thus the inflection
point just past mach 1. (Like most modern military jets prior to
the F-22, the F-18 cannot sustain supersonic speeds in level flight
without afterburners.)

If you have more detailed power/speed curves for the transonic region,
feel free to post some links to enlighten us.


Mark Borgerson

In article ,
says...
mark, you said 'asymptote", and none exists. *that* is bad English?

Is that a question? I guess it is bad English to mix single and double
quotation marks around a word.

It seems to me more likely that you didn't have a clew what the word meant, and
you used it anyway to "prove" to one and all what a genius you are.

Wow-- a real sailorly pun---substituting 'clew' for 'clue'! Are you
sure you aren't a few sheets to the wind?


As for 'asymptote', I did post a reference to a web site defining the
three types of asymptote. In case you missed it, here it is again:

http://www.math.com/tables/derivatives/extrema.htm

The speed of light would seem to fit the definition of a vertical
asymptote, since no KNOWN amount of power will move a boat's speed
past that line. However, if you have evidence to the contrary,
feel free to share!



remember, the term entered this thread when some fraud claiming to be a college
professor totally misused the word.

mark, were that fraud?

If you mean was I the person claiming to be a college professor, the
answer is no.

If you mean 'Was that fraud' I don't know because I don't know the
person who posted that.

You really should ask your ISP why it keeps dropping words from your
postings---sometimes rendering them incomprehensible.


Mark Borgerson






SNIP

yup, you be that fraud.

From: Mark Borgerson
Date: 9/6/2004 11:40 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

In article ,
says...
mark, you said 'asymptote", and none exists. *that* is bad English?

Is that a question? I guess it is bad English to mix single and double
quotation marks around a word.

It seems to me more likely that you didn't have a clew what the word meant,
and
you used it anyway to "prove" to one and all what a genius you are.

Wow-- a real sailorly pun---substituting 'clew' for 'clue'! Are you
sure you aren't a few sheets to the wind?


As for 'asymptote', I did post a reference to a web site defining the
three types of asymptote. In case you missed it, here it is again:

http://www.math.com/tables/derivatives/extrema.htm

The speed of light would seem to fit the definition of a vertical
asymptote, since no KNOWN amount of power will move a boat's speed
past that line. However, if you have evidence to the contrary,
feel free to share!



remember, the term entered this thread when some fraud claiming to be a
college
professor totally misused the word.

mark, were that fraud?

If you mean was I the person claiming to be a college professor, the
answer is no.

If you mean 'Was that fraud' I don't know because I don't know the
person who posted that.

You really should ask your ISP why it keeps dropping words from your
postings---sometimes rendering them incomprehensible.


Mark Borgerson






SNIP

In article ,
says...

Jax,
yup, you be that fraud.

You really ouught to talk to your ISP. They keep substituting the
words of a petulant teenager suffering from hormonal overdose for
your cogent, well-supported arguments.


Hey---I wonder if it works both ways?............

***********************************************
Yo Jax! I not be dat professor Man!
Only in de compote in yo hwed
Is dat asymptote sumpin' u see
cummin' from my machine
to dem words u tink u red!

Wot u Red 'n wot I sed
seems to be like majic
changed to wat u like.
But like dat dutch boy an d' dyke--
It's time to pull it out and see
wat color your thumb be!

Lick it 'n switch it, baby!

************************************************** ***


Hmmm, I wonder if AOL translated that properly!

Jax must be Google-groups deprived, or he would have
the attributions straight by now.


Mark Borgerson



From: Mark Borgerson
Date: 9/6/2004 11:40 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

In article ,
says...
mark, you said 'asymptote", and none exists. *that* is bad English?

Is that a question? I guess it is bad English to mix single and double
quotation marks around a word.

It seems to me more likely that you didn't have a clew what the word meant,
and
you used it anyway to "prove" to one and all what a genius you are.

Wow-- a real sailorly pun---substituting 'clew' for 'clue'! Are you
sure you aren't a few sheets to the wind?


As for 'asymptote', I did post a reference to a web site defining the
three types of asymptote. In case you missed it, here it is again:

http://www.math.com/tables/derivatives/extrema.htm

The speed of light would seem to fit the definition of a vertical
asymptote, since no KNOWN amount of power will move a boat's speed
past that line. However, if you have evidence to the contrary,
feel free to share!



remember, the term entered this thread when some fraud claiming to be a
college
professor totally misused the word.

mark, were that fraud?

If you mean was I the person claiming to be a college professor, the
answer is no.

If you mean 'Was that fraud' I don't know because I don't know the
person who posted that.

You really should ask your ISP why it keeps dropping words from your
postings---sometimes rendering them incomprehensible.


Mark Borgerson






SNIP

mark give up. the curve of hull speed has no asymptote.

that makes you a fraud.

From: Mark Borgerson
Date: 9/7/2004 12:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

In article ,
says...

Jax,
yup, you be that fraud.

You really ouught to talk to your ISP. They keep substituting the
words of a petulant teenager suffering from hormonal overdose for
your cogent, well-supported arguments.


Hey---I wonder if it works both ways?............

***********************************************
Yo Jax! I not be dat professor Man!
Only in de compote in yo hwed
Is dat asymptote sumpin' u see
cummin' from my machine
to dem words u tink u red!

Wot u Red 'n wot I sed
seems to be like majic
changed to wat u like.
But like dat dutch boy an d' dyke--
It's time to pull it out and see
wat color your thumb be!

Lick it 'n switch it, baby!

************************************************* ****


Hmmm, I wonder if AOL translated that properly!

Jax must be Google-groups deprived, or he would have
the attributions straight by now.


Mark Borgerson



From: Mark Borgerson
Date: 9/6/2004 11:40 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

In article ,
says...
mark, you said 'asymptote", and none exists. *that* is bad English?

Is that a question? I guess it is bad English to mix single and double
quotation marks around a word.

It seems to me more likely that you didn't have a clew what the word
meant,
and
you used it anyway to "prove" to one and all what a genius you are.

Wow-- a real sailorly pun---substituting 'clew' for 'clue'! Are you
sure you aren't a few sheets to the wind?


As for 'asymptote', I did post a reference to a web site defining the
three types of asymptote. In case you missed it, here it is again:

http://www.math.com/tables/derivatives/extrema.htm

The speed of light would seem to fit the definition of a vertical
asymptote, since no KNOWN amount of power will move a boat's speed
past that line. However, if you have evidence to the contrary,
feel free to share!



remember, the term entered this thread when some fraud claiming to be a
college
professor totally misused the word.

mark, were that fraud?

If you mean was I the person claiming to be a college professor, the
answer is no.

If you mean 'Was that fraud' I don't know because I don't know the
person who posted that.

You really should ask your ISP why it keeps dropping words from your
postings---sometimes rendering them incomprehensible.


Mark Borgerson






SNIP

In article , JAXAshby wrote:
remember, the term entered this thread when some fraud claiming to be
a college professor totally misused the word.

Please do not call me a fraud. If you have any doubts about my identity,
just send an email to and ask for
confirmation.

I am quite astonished how a little comment by me created such a huge
subthread. Please pardon me for having distracted you from the original
topic of this thread with an obvious but not very helpful observation.
The speed is asymptotic simply because it cannot reach infinity and the
function that gives the speed in dependence of the power is assumed to
be monotonously increasing. We all know about c, the speed of light,
do we? I have never said that the hull speed would be that upper limit.

I made my point because the observation ``more power = more speed''
by Terry Spragg does not tell much as long as we do not know whether it
is asymptotic and, if yes, where the limit is. Or in other words: The
statement ``more power = more speed'' does not contradict the popular
(but incorrect) belief that the hull speed could be that limit.

Andreas.

--
Dr. Andreas F. Borchert, SAI, Universitaet Ulm | Habe Mut, dich deines
Helmholtzstrasse 18, E02, Tel +49 731 50-23572 | eigenen Verstandes zu
http://www.mathematik.uni-ulm.de/sai/borchert/ | bedienen! -- I. Kant

Subject: fuel use for sailboats
From: (Andreas Borchert)
Date: 09/20/2004 11:48 Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

In article , JAXAshby wrote:
remember, the term entered this thread when some fraud claiming to be
a college professor totally misused the word.

Please do not call me a fraud. If you have any doubts about my identity,
just send an email to and ask for
c

Jax (here after referred to as Doodles) calls everyone a fraud .... to begin
with.
One learns quickly when dealing with Doodles, to take most of what he says as
the ramblings of a "Wannabe" who still hasn't decided what exactly he
"Wannabe".
For instance .... he still thinks that planes and boats react the same and that
the FAA is the only authority on navigation and all things "boating".
Doodles is the guy you'll see coming into an anchorage with his wireless
computer on his lap doing a "google" search for the Physics of tidal
computations versus proper catenary for various chain sizes, versus boat
displacement under given wind conditions using three strand or plaid line of
nylon or dacron poly of so many feet versus so many feet of chain with a
Fortress, Danforth, Navy standard, etc. anchor...... who ends up beaching,
cause he forgot to steer by compass (and we all know what Doodles thinks of
compasses) and couldn't trust his 4 GPS and two DGPS.

Shen

Shen44 wrote:
Jax (here after referred to as Doodles) calls everyone a fraud .... to begin
with.

Yeah, calling other people names seems to be all he's good for.

Doodles is the guy you'll see coming into an anchorage with his wireless
computer on his lap doing a "google" search for the Physics of tidal
computations

Nah, he's the kind that never goes anywhere because he's too busy
sneering other peoples boats & skills. As far as can be determined,
Jaxxie went sailing once on somebody elses boat, on a calm afternoon,
and didn't like it much.

DSK