# I think I might understand N3 and the bullet

• 10-02-2007, 07:51 AM
unix
I think I might understand N3 and the bullet

Hmmm. I think just had an insight!!!

As a (fast moving) gas molecule strikes the bullet, there is an N3
reaction. Bullet goes one way, gas molecule goes the other.
Billions of such continuous tiny reactions:

First overcome it's static inertia, then accelerate it down the
barrel, imparting more and more kinetic inertia as it zooms down the
barrel.

As it zooms thru the fluid medium (air, usually), it strikes against
other molecules. These opposing reactions are what is, in
aggregate, known as friction.

Am I still totally off-base?

--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA

Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!
• 10-02-2007, 07:51 AM
unix
Re: I think I might understand N3 and the bullet
On Sep 7, 10:14 pm, Ron Johnson <ron.l.john...@cox.net> wrote:[color=blue]
> Hmmm. I think just had an insight!!!
>
> As a (fast moving) gas molecule strikes the bullet, there is an N3
> reaction. Bullet goes one way, gas molecule goes the other.
> Billions of such continuous tiny reactions:
>
> First overcome it's static inertia, then accelerate it down the
> barrel, imparting more and more kinetic inertia as it zooms down the
> barrel.
>
> As it zooms thru the fluid medium (air, usually), it strikes against
> other molecules. These opposing reactions are what is, in
> aggregate, known as friction.
>
> Am I still totally off-base?
>[/color]

Newton's laws are not just about "motion" even though they carry that
name, but are about the relationship between forces acting upon
objects. Other dead scientists expanded upon those ideas to describe
the interaction of force fields and such.

An N3 reaction happens when any two (or more) masses or forces
interact with each other. The explosion within the chamber (or the
cartridge contained by the chamber) reacts with its entire
surroundings. You describe what happens to the bullet, whose reaction
is most obvious.

The relationship between energy, mass and velocity along with other
factors, many you've already mentioned, will determine the outcome of
the interactions.

• 10-02-2007, 07:51 AM
unix
RE: [INFO-VAX] I think I might understand N3 and the bullet

[color=blue]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: INFO-VAX Discussion [mailto:INFO-VAX@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf
> Of Doug Phillips
> Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2007 12:06 PM
> To: [email]INFO-VAX@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU[/email]
> Subject: Re: [INFO-VAX] I think I might understand N3 and the bullet
>
> On Sep 7, 10:14 pm, Ron Johnson <ron.l.john...@cox.net> wrote:[color=green]
> > Hmmm. I think just had an insight!!!
> >
> > As a (fast moving) gas molecule strikes the bullet, there is an N3
> > reaction. Bullet goes one way, gas molecule goes the other.
> > Billions of such continuous tiny reactions:
> >
> > First overcome it's static inertia, then accelerate it down the
> > barrel, imparting more and more kinetic inertia as it zooms down the
> > barrel.
> >
> > As it zooms thru the fluid medium (air, usually), it strikes against
> > other molecules. These opposing reactions are what is, in
> > aggregate, known as friction.
> >
> > Am I still totally off-base?
> >[/color]
>
> Newton's laws are not just about "motion" even though they carry that
> name, but are about the relationship between forces acting upon
> objects. Other dead scientists expanded upon those ideas to describe
> the interaction of force fields and such.
>
> An N3 reaction happens when any two (or more) masses or forces
> interact with each other. The explosion within the chamber (or the
> cartridge contained by the chamber) reacts with its entire
> surroundings. You describe what happens to the bullet, whose reaction
> is most obvious.
>
> The relationship between energy, mass and velocity along with other
> factors, many you've already mentioned, will determine the outcome of
> the interactions.[/color]

some kind of a time dependent domain, right?

I'm probably *way* out of date with this, but wasn't one of the classic
problems with doing this that you would up having to store really *huge*
state vectors - usually too large for main storage?

Seems to me there was a clever method that used polynomials to do it, but
even that was a nightmare. I remember having to dig back into Matrix Algebra
just to understand what it was doing.

Point is, we actually looked at computing that on a PDP-11/45, but quickly
determined that didn't have enough
go-juice to do the job. I always wondered if it could be done on a VAX- I'm
sure Alpha and Itaniums could do the job. :)

-Paul

• 10-02-2007, 07:51 AM
unix
Re: I think I might understand N3 and the bullet
On Sep 8, 1:31 pm, "Paul Raulerson" <p...@raulersons.com> wrote:[color=blue][color=green]
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: INFO-VAX Discussion [mailto:INFO-...@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf
> > Of Doug Phillips
> > Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2007 12:06 PM
> > To: INFO-...@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> > Subject: Re: [INFO-VAX] I think I might understand N3 and the bullet[/color]
>[color=green]
> > On Sep 7, 10:14 pm, Ron Johnson <ron.l.john...@cox.net> wrote:[color=darkred]
> > > Hmmm. I think just had an insight!!![/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > As a (fast moving) gas molecule strikes the bullet, there is an N3
> > > reaction. Bullet goes one way, gas molecule goes the other.
> > > Billions of such continuous tiny reactions:[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > First overcome it's static inertia, then accelerate it down the
> > > barrel, imparting more and more kinetic inertia as it zooms down the
> > > barrel.[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > As it zooms thru the fluid medium (air, usually), it strikes against
> > > other molecules. These opposing reactions are what is, in
> > > aggregate, known as friction.[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > Am I still totally off-base?[/color][/color]
>[color=green]
> > Newton's laws are not just about "motion" even though they carry that
> > name, but are about the relationship between forces acting upon
> > objects. Other dead scientists expanded upon those ideas to describe
> > the interaction of force fields and such.[/color]
>[color=green]
> > An N3 reaction happens when any two (or more) masses or forces
> > interact with each other. The explosion within the chamber (or the
> > cartridge contained by the chamber) reacts with its entire
> > surroundings. You describe what happens to the bullet, whose reaction
> > is most obvious.[/color]
>[color=green]
> > The relationship between energy, mass and velocity along with other
> > factors, many you've already mentioned, will determine the outcome of
> > the interactions.[/color]
>
> some kind of a time dependent domain, right?
>[/color]

I suppose we might be, but that's getting dangerously close to falling
back into a QM discussion:-) I'd say the parent thread of this one was
working around the edges of stochastic and probability theory, though,
so it might come up there.

Anyway, my practical exposure to LRF was limited to the electronics
world and taking it into a gun chamber might force me to actually open
a book (other than the stack of sci-fan that a friend loaned to me for
the summer and which I'm determined to finish before the snow falls.)
[color=blue]
> I'm probably *way* out of date with this, but wasn't one of the classic
> problems with doing this that you would up having to store really *huge*
> state vectors - usually too large for main storage?
>[/color]

I haven't kept up on it either, but that's my recollection, too.
[color=blue]
> Seems to me there was a clever method that used polynomials to do it, but
> even that was a nightmare. I remember having to dig back into Matrix Algebra
> just to understand what it was doing.
>
> Point is, we actually looked at computing that on a PDP-11/45, but quickly
> determined that didn't have enough
> go-juice to do the job. I always wondered if it could be done on a VAX- I'm
> sure Alpha and Itaniums could do the job. :)
>[/color]

I'd wonder if maybe someplace one or two aren't actually doing it.

Looking back (which I was forced to do when I cleaned out 30 years of
accumulated printouts, disks, tapes and manuals from the office) I'm
amazed at what we could do with so little resource.

One of my first jobs as a programmer/operator was running a bill-of-
materials and production forecast through a mainframe -- using punch-
cards -- drawers full of punch-cards. Ran most of the night and output
drawers full of new cards. I think I only dropped a stack once (maybe
twice) when I got a bit too daring.

There was a halt about mid-way through the run and you had to dial in
an instruction to jump back into the code. You got to where you could
tell what the machine was doing just by listening to it.

Woke up from some strange nightmares a few times back then. The next
system I worked with actually had *disk* -- Wow!:-)

Ah, the "good old days" (not!)

• 10-02-2007, 07:51 AM
unix
Re: I think I might understand N3 and the bullet
In article <7soEi.41014\$Pv4.10282@newsfe19.lga>, Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net> writes:[color=blue]
>
> As it zooms thru the fluid medium (air, usually), it strikes against
> other molecules. These opposing reactions are what is, in
> aggregate, known as friction.[/color]

No, there cause what is known as pressure.
[color=blue]
> Am I still totally off-base?[/color]

No.