Originally posted by doctorstrongbad
This would make him weaker to Magneto's attacks. Magneto should eb able to win this fight.
Assuming that Magneto can get past his Bio-aura force field.
Or manipulate the hell out of it.
Magneto could win this pretty easily if not for the speedblitz, which I still can't see Erik reacting to.
Originally posted by SoljerTruth be told. Such equations can be used to model actual situations, but without the extra information: grip of the tires, design of tire tread patterns and the diffusion of force across them, air resistance, temperature effects on rubber erosion, temperature effects on the pavement, and a myriad of other things, the equation he posted on its own can only be used to give an average measure and never a definitive measure.
Not that it has to do with your argument - but I'd like to point out that the equations CAN, in fact, be used to model an actual situation. You just have to take into account the rotational motion as well as the translational, and take into account the coefficient of kinetic friction time the normal force. Obviously, it will increase at a constant rate till the burned rubber is enough to grasp the pavement.But....
Such a situation CAN be modeled with almost perfect accuracy using these 'worthless' equations.
Superman wins. The options available to him that are over Mags are overwhelming.
Besides simple speedblitz, there are full force heat vision, Freeze breath, and Sonics.
Superman could simply fly into space and fry mags, KO him with Blackbolt like sonic accuracy, toss the entire continent they are on with mags on it to the sun, make Mags the bubblegum center of a massive glacier...etc.
Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Truth be told. Such equations can be used to model actual situations, but without the extra information: grip of the tires, design of tire tread patterns and the diffusion of force across them, air resistance, temperature effects on rubber erosion, temperature effects on the pavement, and a myriad of other things, the equation he posted on its own can only be used to give an average measure and never a definitive measure.
True, true. And it's a given. I'm just saying that it IS possible to represent MUCH more complex systems, assuming you CAN take certain unknowns into account.
That's all. 🙂.
Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Now I will tell you why your reliance on your equation is absolutely wrong with regards to how you measure acceleration ability. Because in my head, I thought of a situation where I hit the gas and for one full second, I peeled rubber and the car did not actually move. The tires spun in place because they lacked grip, like a drag racing car whose tires smoke. Afterwards, during several seconds of my travel, I actually increased my speed to 80 mph to make up for the lost seconds of time at the start. Thusly, in such a situation, I still covered 1 mile in 60 seconds and such a situation is absolutely different from your predicted result.Therefore, your reliance on the equation is faulty, because it is not an actual measure of what occurs at any given point during the travel. It only gives an average measure.
What you mentioned was good though. Static friction>=kinetic friction.
But in many cases in physics , this difference is negligable (sometimes 0)and virtually makes no difference in the actual measurements.