>> ^longde:

So, if a local teacher used you or any of your loved ones in a murder example, that would be cool...hypothetically speaking, of course>> ^LarsaruS:
>> ^IronDwarf:
>> ^NordlichReiter:
I had a college professor, for game design, one of many problems involved the trajectory of artillery.
At what angle would you need to raise the barrel of a 150MM Howitzer in order to crest the top of a hill that is 150 meters high, and hit a target that is 5 miles away?
Here's the real question. What would be done if the geometry teacher had said, where would someone stand if they intended to kill say, Osama Bin Laden? Probably nothing.

I'm not even sure how to respond to you if you don't see the difference in using a hated enemy of the country and the President in a hypothetical math problem.

Well, the first is a human being and the second is a human being too... Wait? What was the question again?
Ah, right... Hypothetical!



Yes. It would be. I don't let hypothetical statements bother me... there are a lot more stuff to be bothered by in real life. And if it works and the students learn (more than they would have otherwise)... I say go for it.

So, if a local teacher used you or any of your loved ones in a murder example, that would be cool...hypothetically speaking, of course>> ^LarsaruS:

>> ^IronDwarf:
>> ^NordlichReiter:
I had a college professor, for game design, one of many problems involved the trajectory of artillery.
At what angle would you need to raise the barrel of a 150MM Howitzer in order to crest the top of a hill that is 150 meters high, and hit a target that is 5 miles away?
Here's the real question. What would be done if the geometry teacher had said, where would someone stand if they intended to kill say, Osama Bin Laden? Probably nothing.

I'm not even sure how to respond to you if you don't see the difference in using a hated enemy of the country and the President in a hypothetical math problem.

Well, the first is a human being and the second is a human being too... Wait? What was the question again?
Ah, right... Hypothetical!

>> ^IronDwarf:

>> ^NordlichReiter:
I had a college professor, for game design, one of many problems involved the trajectory of artillery.
At what angle would you need to raise the barrel of a 150MM Howitzer in order to crest the top of a hill that is 150 meters high, and hit a target that is 5 miles away?
Here's the real question. What would be done if the geometry teacher had said, where would someone stand if they intended to kill say, Osama Bin Laden? Probably nothing.

I'm not even sure how to respond to you if you don't see the difference in using a hated enemy of the country and the President in a hypothetical math problem.


Well, the first is a human being and the second is a human being too... Wait? What was the question again?
Ah, right... Hypothetical!

>> ^NordlichReiter:

I had a college professor, for game design, one of many problems involved the trajectory of artillery.
At what angle would you need to raise the barrel of a 150MM Howitzer in order to crest the top of a hill that is 150 meters high, and hit a target that is 5 miles away?
Here's the real question. What would be done if the geometry teacher had said, where would someone stand if they intended to kill say, Osama Bin Laden? Probably nothing.


I'm not even sure how to respond to you if you don't see the difference in using a hated enemy of the country and the President in a hypothetical math problem.

I had a college professor, for game design, one of many problems involved the trajectory of artillery.

At what angle would you need to raise the barrel of a 150MM Howitzer in order to crest the top of a hill that is 150 meters high, and hit a target that is 5 miles away?

Here's the real question. What would be done if the geometry teacher had said, where would someone stand if they intended to kill say, Osama Bin Laden? Probably nothing.

>> ^choggie:

how about, "fuck comment voting!"....look in a mirror or at your own dick if you want some validation for your "world of the self" disorder....or better yet, go try to have an actual conversation with like-minded or influential potentials....so you really need to look at yourself in the mirror as you masturbate?
Fucking hate, hated, hating, could care less for, , and have always hated, the widget that is, COMMENT VOTING....Most of you, if you will be real (honest) with yourselves... could give a fiddlers fuck what someone anon thinks that what you ejaculated yesterday, is clever, EVER!
I vote to banish comment voting as the schism that reeks of cancer that it is/has become, forever on this site...let yer sifting and votes speak tomes ya bunch a jiz-shooting males who have a say in your own trajectory.....use a tissue and not an old t-shirt ya buncha "never gonna breed motherfuckers!"
Don't really see, and ain't gonna, the few women that haven't been scared away from the site or hold out against all odds, chiming in here ...........Why?? Cause they are smarter than the internet, ya fuckin' buncha dick-less males.


Oh, the irony.

>> ^choggie:

how about, "fuck comment voting!"....look in a mirror or at your own dick if you want some validation for your "world of the self" disorder....or better yet, go try to have an actual conversation with like-minded or influential potentials....so you really need to look at yourself in the mirror as you masturbate?
Fucking hate, hated, hating, could care less for, , and have always hated, the widget that is, COMMENT VOTING....Most of you, if you will be real (honest) with yourselves... could give a fiddlers fuck what someone anon thinks that what you ejaculated yesterday, is clever, EVER!
I vote to banish comment voting as the schism that reeks of cancer that it is/has become, forever on this site...let yer sifting and votes speak tomes ya bunch a jiz-shooting males who have a say in your own trajectory.....use a tissue and not an old t-shirt ya buncha "never gonna breed motherfuckers!"
Don't really see, and ain't gonna, the few women that haven't been scared away from the site or hold out against all odds, chiming in here ...........Why?? Cause they are smarter than the internet, ya fuckin' buncha dick-less males.

In a short sidetrack, any idea when we can expect "ignore" to start working again? I'm getting really tired of seeing this kind of crap...

>> ^choggie:

how about, "fuck comment voting!"....look in a mirror or at your own dick if you want some validation for your "world of the self" disorder....or better yet, go try to have an actual conversation with like-minded or influential potentials....so you really need to look at yourself in the mirror as you masturbate?
Fucking hate, hated, hating, could care less for, , and have always hated, the widget that is, COMMENT VOTING....Most of you, if you will be real (honest) with yourselves... could give a fiddlers fuck what someone anon thinks that what you ejaculated yesterday, is clever, EVER!
I vote to banish comment voting as the schism that reeks of cancer that it is/has become, forever on this site...let yer sifting and votes speak tomes ya bunch a jiz-shooting males who have a say in your own trajectory.....use a tissue and not an old t-shirt ya buncha "never gonna breed motherfuckers!"
Don't really see, and ain't gonna, the few women that haven't been scared away from the site or hold out against all odds, chiming in here ...........Why?? Cause they are smarter than the internet, ya fuckin' buncha dick-less males.



Bull shit.

how about, "fuck comment voting!"....look in a mirror or at your own dick if you want some validation for your "world of the self" disorder....or better yet, go try to have an actual conversation with like-minded or influential potentials....so you really need to look at yourself in the mirror as you masturbate?
Fucking hate, hated, hating, could care less for, , and have always hated, the widget that is, COMMENT VOTING....Most of you, if you will be real (honest) with yourselves... could give a fiddlers fuck what someone anon thinks that what you ejaculated yesterday, is clever, EVER!

I vote to banish comment voting as the schism that reeks of cancer that it is/has become, forever on this site...let yer sifting and votes speak tomes ya bunch a jiz-shooting males who have a say in your own trajectory.....use a tissue and not an old t-shirt ya buncha "never gonna breed motherfuckers!"

Don't really see, and ain't gonna, the few women that haven't been scared away from the site or hold out against all odds, chiming in here ...........Why?? Cause they are smarter than the internet, ya fuckin' buncha dick-less males.

>> ^geo321:

So you've got no love for the Big Bang that is propelling us, our planet, and our solar system into an unknown trajectory. Extroverting towards the future open minded to enriching you're ideology with new ideas, or keeping a frame on your belief system and viewing the world within an old passed down cultural ideology from reinterpreted myths of our past. >> ^honkey
tonk73:
Jesus created all 14.5 billion lights years of it in ONE day. It took the rest of the 7 day week to make the Earth. Absa-freakin-lutely amazing isn't it?




I should have added *sarcasm* to my statement LOL.

I still don't get how there are individuals who believe a 14.5 billion light year expanse was created a few thousand years ago over the time span of a single 'day' (whatever a DAY is defined as).. including all the photons 'in-transit' over that expanse such that it appears it is that old. Simply for human visual amusement? To keep us on our toes? Ah I know. The 'mysterious ways' argument!

So you've got no love for the Big Bang that is propelling us, our planet, and our solar system into an unknown trajectory. Extroverting towards the future open minded to enriching you're ideology with new ideas, or keeping a frame on your belief system and viewing the world within an old passed down cultural ideology from reinterpreted myths of our past. >> ^honkeytonk73:

Jesus created all 14.5 billion lights years of it in ONE day. It took the rest of the 7 day week to make the Earth. Absa-freakin-lutely amazing isn't it?

Shooting a target that is on the move is not very hard provided you've practiced it enough.

It's all very complicated, I think Gunny Hathcock called it SWAG. In a book called One Shot one kill.

Now as I understand it, once a sniper has taken a shot they EXFIL their hide depending on how bad the situation is. If shit hit the fan I'd imagine they GTFO, but if it was a successful one shot one kill job then they would make their way to the extraction point very slow like. So as not to give away their positions and fuck up on the one yard line.

Sniping you have a lot of shit to deal with. Weather, range, ballistics, and trajectory. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sniper

Once you understand how a scope works, and how to deal with the ballistics of the shell you've chosen for the job the rest is practice.

Looking at the targeting section of the Wikipedia entry on snipers I can't say that is easy. Because I sure as hell don't understand it with just a cursory glance.

I would wonder why the "special forces" in the movie are called special at all. They looked like a ragtag team of douchebags to me.

I like the sound of the soundbite. The speech sounds good. Obama will come down in history as a master orator. But with his policies and appointments I think he's on the trajectory of losing his political base that elected him.

hahaha all of you couch physicists. Yea, the only force acting on the bullet in the "y" component is gravity. It's the same for both bullets. In fact the acceleration due to gravity is the same for a bullet and a bowling ball or a semi-truck and a feather (in a vacuum of course).

Now the spin of the bullet, while stabilizing the bullets trajectory in the "x" direction, has very little affect over the bullets fall. That's probably a little more difficult to understand. Would probably need a course in fluids and aerodynamics to solve that.

The harder thing to understand would be if I told you that if you fired a bullet from a rooftop straight down to the ground, or you fired it at an upward angle, due to the conservation of energy, both bullets would have to be travelling at the same velocity magnitude when they hit the ground (although direction at impact would be different, obviously).

That didn't seem counter-intuitive to me at all, assuming that the starting trajectory of the path is perfectly parallel to a perfectly flat surface beneath it.

Then again, the newtonian laws that one learns in High School or University starting physics classes tends to ignore lots of minor variables as mentioned above, like air resistance / friction. However, when you apply the simplified equations to real life experiments, it is usually quite amazing how accurate they are even having ignored those factors.

Your question about vertical friction changing depending on the horizontal speed of the bullet is an interesting one, jwray. It seems like there would be more exposure to molecules of air, so the friction would be slightly higher for a fast-moving bullet. On the other hand, being shot out of a gun would instantly overcome the stronger coefficient of resting friction versus the weaker coefficient of friction in motion. I agree that lift wouldn't be a factor due to symmetry. I guess I'm not surprised that any effect of friction is negligible in practical experimentation (ie Mythbusters), but I bet that you are correct that there is a slight difference between the two scenarios, but it is probably smaller than the effects of other, uncontrolled chaotic variables that differ between tests.