If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Does the Weight of an Airplane and Contents Change?
The weight lost from perspiration and the passengers burning calories is
insignificant. Consider that a plane burns a few thousand pounds of fuel per hour, then even if you had each person managing to burn a pound of energy sustaining themselves on the flight (a generous guesstimate) on a 747 you'd come in ~400 lbs less at landing than takeoff. No biggie. And that would assume the pound used to sustain themselves left the plane. After all, if you lose a pound, it doesn't disappear, it goes someplace. Is excrement not jettisoned overboard? We have all heard stories of frozen turds crashing through roofs. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Does the Weight of an Airplane and Contents Change?
freeda wrote:
Is excrement not jettisoned overboard? We have all heard stories of frozen turds crashing through roofs. This might happen due to leakage, but this stuff is actually supposed to stay in the tank until it is deposed of after landing. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Does the Weight of an Airplane and Contents Change?
"A Mate" wrote in message u...
"nobody" wrote in message ... Alan Bell wrote: after we eat, the same as when the plane took off? And what about two hours after we eat? When nature takes it course, is the aggregate weight still the same? Overall, you sweat or exhale a lot of the water contents of the food you eat/drink, and that humidity is dumped overboard as the air is replaced in the cabin. The E = MC2 aspect would probably be so small that it wouldn't matter with regards to mass converted to energy by muscles. E=mc2 - refers to energy creation and destruction of matter - as in a nuclear or thermo-nuclear reaction. Nothing to do with the energy transformations which occur in the human body!! Slow down jasper. If we're picking nits, this ain't true. Energy has mass. When energy is transferred, mass is transfered. When my body expels heat, by conduction, convection, or radiation, it is expelling mass. Now, the nit aspect is that the mass expelled is incredibly tiny. Take the amount of energy radiated, divide by the SQUARE of the speed of light and that's the amount of mass. I'm not sure my calculator will display that many zeros. So if I have a window seat, and I'm radiating heat out the window (a trick in and of itself since the windows aren't transparent to most of the wavelengths I radiate) mass is being lost. If I wind my watch, the spring in the watch gets heavier. Truth is, when the aircraft takes off, and therefore accelerates all of our bodies to higher kinetic energy states, it increases all of our masses. So really, in the net sense, it isn't clear what "initial" mass the original question is refering. It's probably safe to presume "rest mass" though. The aircraft would weigh exactly what it did on take-off MINUS the weight of water lost in air exchange, fuel burnt and waste matter jettisoned through the toilet and waste water systems. Yes, this is the simple answer. If there is no mass exchange over the fuselage boundary, the total mass will stay constant. So if no air is being exchanged, and no fluids are being dumped, the total mass has to stay constant. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Does the Weight of an Airplane and Contents Change?
after we eat, the same as when the plane took off? And what about
two hours after we eat? When nature takes it course, is the aggregate weight still the same? Overall, you sweat or exhale a lot of the water contents of the food you eat/drink, and that humidity is dumped overboard as the air is replaced in the cabin. The E = MC2 aspect would probably be so small that it wouldn't matter with regards to mass converted to energy by muscles. E=mc2 - refers to energy creation and destruction of matter - as in a nuclear or thermo-nuclear reaction. Nothing to do with the energy transformations which occur in the human body!! Slow down jasper. If we're picking nits, this ain't true. Energy has mass. When energy is transferred, mass is transfered. When my body expels heat, by conduction, convection, or radiation, it is expelling mass. Now, the nit aspect is that the mass expelled is incredibly tiny. Take the amount of energy radiated, divide by the SQUARE of the speed of light and that's the amount of mass. I'm not sure my calculator will display that many zeros. So if I have a window seat, and I'm radiating heat out the window (a trick in and of itself since the windows aren't transparent to most of the wavelengths I radiate) mass is being lost. If I wind my watch, the spring in the watch gets heavier. Truth is, when the aircraft takes off, and therefore accelerates all of our bodies to higher kinetic energy states, it increases all of our masses. So really, in the net sense, it isn't clear what "initial" mass the original question is refering. It's probably safe to presume "rest mass" though. Not quite true, the energy created by your body is a chemical reaction, not a nuclear reaction. All that is changing is the bonds between molecules. ie an exothermic reaction. (****, I really can't remember most of my scholo chemistry). Although what you are saying about an aircraft increasing in mass during flight is true, your explanation is wrong, it has nothing to do with kinetic energy. just do a google search for 'lorentz transformations', although the amount will be negligable until you start approaching the speed of light. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Does the Weight of an Airplane and Contents Change?
"freeda" wrote in message ... after we eat, the same as when the plane took off? And what about two hours after we eat? When nature takes it course, is the aggregate weight still the same? Overall, you sweat or exhale a lot of the water contents of the food you eat/drink, and that humidity is dumped overboard as the air is replaced in the cabin. The E = MC2 aspect would probably be so small that it wouldn't matter with regards to mass converted to energy by muscles. E=mc2 - refers to energy creation and destruction of matter - as in a nuclear or thermo-nuclear reaction. Nothing to do with the energy transformations which occur in the human body!! Slow down jasper. If we're picking nits, this ain't true. Energy has mass. When energy is transferred, mass is transfered. When my body expels heat, by conduction, convection, or radiation, it is expelling mass. Now, the nit aspect is that the mass expelled is incredibly tiny. Take the amount of energy radiated, divide by the SQUARE of the speed of light and that's the amount of mass. I'm not sure my calculator will display that many zeros. So if I have a window seat, and I'm radiating heat out the window (a trick in and of itself since the windows aren't transparent to most of the wavelengths I radiate) mass is being lost. If I wind my watch, the spring in the watch gets heavier. Truth is, when the aircraft takes off, and therefore accelerates all of our bodies to higher kinetic energy states, it increases all of our masses. So really, in the net sense, it isn't clear what "initial" mass the original question is refering. It's probably safe to presume "rest mass" though. Not quite true, the energy created by your body is a chemical reaction, not a nuclear reaction. All that is changing is the bonds between molecules. ie an exothermic reaction. (****, I really can't remember most of my scholo chemistry). Although what you are saying about an aircraft increasing in mass during flight is true, your explanation is wrong, it has nothing to do with kinetic energy. just do a google search for 'lorentz transformations', although the amount will be negligable until you start approaching the speed of light. Are you talking about relativistic mass or invarient mass ? (and what is weight anyway) - If it is what is measured by a set of (very large) bathroom scales it will also reduce as the aircraft moves further away from the planet. So it will reduce during flight and increase again as it comes back to land. (due to gravitational attraction) |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Does the Weight of an Airplane and Contents Change?
after we eat, the same as when the plane took off? And what
about two hours after we eat? When nature takes it course, is the aggregate weight still the same? Overall, you sweat or exhale a lot of the water contents of the food you eat/drink, and that humidity is dumped overboard as the air is replaced in the cabin. The E = MC2 aspect would probably be so small that it wouldn't matter with regards to mass converted to energy by muscles. E=mc2 - refers to energy creation and destruction of matter - as in a nuclear or thermo-nuclear reaction. Nothing to do with the energy transformations which occur in the human body!! Slow down jasper. If we're picking nits, this ain't true. Energy has mass. When energy is transferred, mass is transfered. When my body expels heat, by conduction, convection, or radiation, it is expelling mass. Now, the nit aspect is that the mass expelled is incredibly tiny. Take the amount of energy radiated, divide by the SQUARE of the speed of light and that's the amount of mass. I'm not sure my calculator will display that many zeros. So if I have a window seat, and I'm radiating heat out the window (a trick in and of itself since the windows aren't transparent to most of the wavelengths I radiate) mass is being lost. If I wind my watch, the spring in the watch gets heavier. Truth is, when the aircraft takes off, and therefore accelerates all of our bodies to higher kinetic energy states, it increases all of our masses. So really, in the net sense, it isn't clear what "initial" mass the original question is refering. It's probably safe to presume "rest mass" though. Not quite true, the energy created by your body is a chemical reaction, not a nuclear reaction. All that is changing is the bonds between molecules. ie an exothermic reaction. (****, I really can't remember most of my scholo chemistry). Although what you are saying about an aircraft increasing in mass during flight is true, your explanation is wrong, it has nothing to do with kinetic energy. just do a google search for 'lorentz transformations', although the amount will be negligable until you start approaching the speed of light. Are you talking about relativistic mass or invarient mass ? (and what is weight anyway) - If it is what is measured by a set of (very large) bathroom scales it will also reduce as the aircraft moves further away from the planet. So it will reduce during flight and increase again as it comes back to land. (due to gravitational attraction) Mass then. and talking about relativistic mass. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Does the Weight of an Airplane and Contents Change?
Not quite true, the energy created by your body is a chemical reaction, not a nuclear reaction. All that is changing is the bonds between molecules. ie an exothermic reaction. (****, I really can't remember most of my scholo chemistry). Although what you are saying about an aircraft increasing in mass during flight is true, your explanation is wrong, it has nothing to do with kinetic energy. just do a google search for 'lorentz transformations', although the amount will be negligable until you start approaching the speed of light. Are you talking about relativistic mass or invarient mass ? (and what is weight anyway) - If it is what is measured by a set of (very large) bathroom scales it will also reduce as the aircraft moves further away from the planet. So it will reduce during flight and increase again as it comes back to land. (due to gravitational attraction) Mass then. and talking about relativistic mass. Which most scientists would argue is a little irrelevant :-) But going back to an offshoot from the OP's original question, how much the weight of the aircraft be reduced at 30,000 feet due to the reduction in gravity ? (Assuming the positions of the moon and sun can be discounted). |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Does the Weight of an Airplane and Contents Change?
mtravelkay wrote:
ender wrote: The weight lost from perspiration and the passengers burning calories is insignificant. Consider that a plane burns a few thousand pounds of fuel per hour, then even if you had each person managing to burn a pound of energy sustaining themselves on the flight (a generous guesstimate) on a 747 you'd come in ~400 lbs less at landing than takeoff. No biggie. And that would assume the pound used to sustain themselves left the plane. After all, if you lose a pound, it doesn't disappear, it goes someplace. I'm not talking about people ****ting here. When you sit at your computer, your body burns calories generating heat, speaking, moving around, digesting food, etc. The mass of food you ate on the plane or before boarding is converted to heat, sound, kinetic energy. The fact that people sit on a plane more or less emphasizes that this loss of energy, and the mass used to create it, is tiny, and therefore negligible. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Does the Weight of an Airplane and Contents Change?
"Miss L. Toe" wrote in message
... But going back to an offshoot from the OP's original question, how much the weight of the aircraft be reduced at 30,000 feet due to the reduction in gravity ? (Assuming the positions of the moon and sun can be discounted). Gravity goes as the inverse square of the distance. Taking the initial distance, r0, to be at the surface of the Earth where the weight of the plane is w0: r0 = 6380 km (approximately) w1/w0 = (r0/r1)^2 =(r0/(r0 + h))^2 h is the plane's height above r0 30,000 feet is about 9.14 km. So the weight ratio becomes: w1/w0 = (6380/(6380 + 9.14))^2 = 0.997 The weight change is about 0.3% . |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Does the Weight of an Airplane and Contents Change?
On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 15:36:43 -0000, "Miss L. Toe"
wrote: Not quite true, the energy created by your body is a chemical reaction, not a nuclear reaction. All that is changing is the bonds between molecules. ie an exothermic reaction. (****, I really can't remember most of my scholo chemistry). Although what you are saying about an aircraft increasing in mass during flight is true, your explanation is wrong, it has nothing to do with kinetic energy. just do a google search for 'lorentz transformations', although the amount will be negligable until you start approaching the speed of light. Are you talking about relativistic mass or invarient mass ? (and what is weight anyway) - If it is what is measured by a set of (very large) bathroom scales it will also reduce as the aircraft moves further away from the planet. So it will reduce during flight and increase again as it comes back to land. (due to gravitational attraction) Mass then. and talking about relativistic mass. Which most scientists would argue is a little irrelevant :-) But going back to an offshoot from the OP's original question, how much the weight of the aircraft be reduced at 30,000 feet due to the reduction in gravity ? (Assuming the positions of the moon and sun can be discounted). No change, as the ambiguous word "weight" is normally used in the context of aircraft loading. But for the different definition of weight which you obviously have in mind, 30 000 ft above where? Note that 30 000 ft above the North Pole is 60 000 ft closer to the center of Earth than the surface at the top of Mt. Chimborazo, and 30 000 ft above Mt. Chimborazo is 20 970 000 ft farther from the axis of rotation than the surface at the North Pole. Gene Nygaard http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Gene_Nygaard/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|