| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 107104 | 2010-02-04 04:10:00 | Speeding legal? | lance4k (4644) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 855262 | 2010-02-08 22:55:00 | Have you ever considered what you would do if you met a fellow idiot coming the other way and doing a 'tight merge at 120kph like you?? That is a 240kph coming together and you won't be writing a cheerful account of your misdemeanour's after that They had those ads a while back you might remember. Cars were dropped by a crane onto the ground. After showing the one at 50kph it cut to a woman who said 'I can't believe that this much damage would happen with 2 cars going 25kph running into each other'. Well good news lady, you're right. They had to have a random person saying it cause it's complete bollocks. A car hitting another car at 25kph each is the same as a car hitting a solid object at 25kph. Think about it, in each case the car is going from 25kph to 0kph. |
shermo (12739) | ||
| 855263 | 2010-02-08 23:15:00 | The message still is, if you speed the faster the speed the bigger the mess. Some people are intellectually challenged and just can not take message onboard. Emergency vehicles NT and autobahn speeds are just red herrings they throw up. They should be treated like holocaust deniers. |
prefect (6291) | ||
| 855264 | 2010-02-09 00:36:00 | The message still is, if you speed the faster the speed the bigger the mess. Some people are intellectually challenged and just can not take message onboard. Emergency vehicles NT and autobahn speeds are just red herrings they throw up. They should be treated like holocaust deniers. Then what is a safe speed ? 0 Kms ? |
wmoore (6009) | ||
| 855265 | 2010-02-09 01:03:00 | A car hitting another car at 25kph each is the same as a car hitting a solid object at 25kph. Didn't do too good at school with maths, huh?? :( :( |
Zippity (58) | ||
| 855266 | 2010-02-09 02:17:00 | Didn't do too good at school with maths, huh?? :( :( Save the ad hominum attacks please. Go ahead and demonstrate how I'm wrong. |
shermo (12739) | ||
| 855267 | 2010-02-09 02:28:00 | No, I'm the guy that pulls over to let you past, I'm also the guy who watched his mirrors, saw the reckless idiot coming up from behind and slows down to let you in at the end of your dangerous passing manoeuvre. I'm the guy that also checks his rear vision mirror to make sure the oncoming idiot didn't crash because somebody has to do first-aid until the ambulance arrives and I carry a kit. I'm the one that lets you merge in heavy traffic, even though you've driven up the left-turn only lane to get to the head of the queue, so that you don't hold up all the considerate drivers who simply want to turn left. I'm also the guy who takes your number and vehicle description if I see some particularly outrageous act of motorised stupidity, or if I think you might be under the influence of drink or drugs, and phones it in to the police (hands free) in the faint hope you might get caught before you kill somebody or an act of retaliatory road rage kills you. In extreme cases I'll follow you if possible to do so safely to make sure they find you. When I was in my late teens and still stupid, somebody stopped me late one night because they thought I wasn't fit to drive (they were right too) then they drove me and my car home to my flat and put me to bed. I woke in the morning with my car locked in the driveway, keys and wallet beside the bed, and a thumping hangover. I'd return that favour any time the opportunity presents itself, and have done from parties but left their car there of course. I've been no angel on the road, I travelled a lot for business and had a very effective radar detector so driving home from Taupo to Auckland at warp speed in time for dinner was normal practice, but I changed my behaviour because of the risk to myself and others. When you grow up, have kids and start caring about others, you might surprise yourself by changing your behaviour too. If you say you are grown up and think your speeding is safe because you are a good driver or have a good car, I've got news for you, you're neither. Billy You're not you! You're me! Thought something was different this morning! |
johcar (6283) | ||
| 855268 | 2010-02-09 02:38:00 | Save the ad hominum attacks please. Go ahead and demonstrate how I'm wrong. Better still, prove to the rest of us that you are right........................:xmouth::xmouth: |
Zippity (58) | ||
| 855269 | 2010-02-09 02:50:00 | If you insist. As in any physics problem, we need to make some heroic assumptions. Firstly, let's assume the cars are identical. Secondly, let's assume they hit perfectly front on, or in the case of car vs wall the wall doesn't move. Thirdly, let's assume that we're driving modern cars, and the crumple zones do their job. The final assumption is important since it means we're likely to have an inelastic collision. Consider the momentum of one car in either situation. In the situation of the car smashing into a solid object the car was initially travelling at 25k, after the collision, it is now stationary, crushed against the wall, so its final velocity is 0k. In the situation of 2 cars hitting each other, one car was initially travelling at 25k, the two cars collide. Given the above assumptions both cars will come to rest. Final velocity is 0k. It should be clear that in both situations the car has experienced the same change in momentum. Alternatively, consider a hand wavey energy explanation. in the car vs car situation there is double the energy, but that energy is disappated across both cars. So the energy change the car experiences in both situations is equal. Or if you're a visual person, draw yourself a diagram of both situations. Then take one hand and cover the wall or second car. The first car doesn't care what it's crashed into, it's still done the same thing in both cases. It's been a while, so I'd be interested in any discussion. Alternatively, you can return to your ad hominum mouth frothing responses. |
shermo (12739) | ||
| 855270 | 2010-02-09 03:12:00 | Nah, thanks, but I'd rather leave it to Einstein. :) ad homy out. |
Zippity (58) | ||
| 855271 | 2010-02-09 03:33:00 | Ok, nice to know you're willing to call me an idiot and then run away when confronted about it. | shermo (12739) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 | |||||