P3D Re: Flamin' Bumblees, George!

[Brian Reynolds <reynolds@xxxxxxxxx>]

I know that a dead horse is suffering greatly because of the beating
I'm about to give it, but here goes anyway.

Michael Georgoff wrote:
> 
> Bob Maxey points out ("At the risk of getting Flamed or even Char
> Broiled"), that the bumblebee, by all aerodynamic rights, should not
> be able to fly, and with a good P-3D-like listserv group, it would
> cease to.  Excellent, gentle use of parody/metaphor relative to our
> flogging math-based stereo base issues to death.
> 

In fact modern aerodynamics can reasonably explain how a bumblebee
flies.  At the turn of the century scientists did not have a strong
knowledge of fluid dynamics, or how it related to aerodynamics.  At
that time the statement that a bumblebee could not fly based on our
(then current) knowledge of aerodynamics would be true.  I'm sure
Orville and Wilbur would be quick to point out that the "experts" of
the time didn't know the whole picture.  With the introduction of the
Reynolds Number (no relation) to the fluid dynamics theories the
flight of the bumblebee could be explained.

Now if you had said that our current (general) understanding of stereo
base was at the level of aerodynamics theories at the turn of the
century I could agree (and be prepared to be proven wrong).

-- 
Brian Reynolds                  | "Humans explore the Universe with five
reynolds@xxxxxxxxx              |   senses and call the adventure science."
http://www.panix.com/~reynolds/ | - Edwin P. Hubble


------------------------------