Mailing List lml@lancaironline.net Message #39938
From: Paul Lipps <elippse@sbcglobal.net>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: lift
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 18:57:12 -0500
To: <lml>
    It seems that everything I read about lift describes it in terms of effect, not cause, i.e.  Lift occurs because flow is turned downward creating downwash. Well, what made the air turn downward? Lift occurs when a moving flow of gas is turned by a solid object. Just how did this solid object turn it? Citing Newton's action -reaction still does not explain what caused the action. And to me, these explanations are not theories in the strictest sense, they are hypotheses. Until a hypothesis has been reduced to an actual theory, which completely describes how a process comes about, is provable, and is accepted by the experts as the real explanation, any hypothesis has as much validity as any other, regardless of how bizarre it may seem, such as my "Hose&Kite" hypothesis. The very fact that there are so many explanations put forth on lift, each one with its own devotees, proves my point; no one really seems to know what causes the pressure reduction. Showing all these wonderful pressure diagrams and saying that they are what causes lift still does not say how these pressure gradients were generated!
    Here's one that really gets to me:  Lift=rho V^2 CL A / 2. That equation implies that dynamic pressure generates lift. If so, how can it generate 50% more lift than is available from the dynamic pressure when operating at a CL 1.5? Or even three pounds of lift per one pound of dynamic pressure when a wing has slats and slotted flaps and has a CL of 3.0? Is the wing similar to a wedge that takes a linear force and creates a much greater normal force? So, basically, all these write-ups say one thing - nobody really knows for certain where lift comes from!
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster