Comment on Students’ Leaf Blower Suppressor To Hit Retail

• mosiacmango@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Are you saying novel mechanical engineering designs are impossible? That the mechanism of a leaf blower is so near perfection, that a well funded team of 4 mechanical engineering students could not, without VIOLATING THE LAWS OF PHYSICS, have simply found a better mechanism?

  I agree with your “show me the numbers” critique, but I find your complete disregard of what may be a better answer without any data at all to be equally foolhardy.

  source

  • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    I am saying every single one of these claims have never wound up being actually true since they go against the very nature of physics. Yet people perpetuate the claims and defend them without the supporting data.

    source

    • mosiacmango@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      never wound up being actually true since they go against the very nature of physics.

      This is an incredibly wild statement when you have no data on the device’s construction or operation.

      Youre complaining about a lack of data then making wild assumptions about it with no data.

      Not exactly good science here, mate.

      source

      • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        It’s a wild statement to claim it doesn’t reduce power when even increasing the length of the discharge tube would affect its performance, and they’ve added a good 8”.

        The fact that they purposely omitted data that they have is extremely concerning, it’s not a bold claim say it’s obviously false. It’s bold to claim something like that that goes against what we already know about physics.

        I am sorry you are eating up this “marketing”, it’s why products like this are even sold, it’s hilarious, the amount of people defending this asinine claim is honestly quite shocking, especially on a community like this.

        Not exactly a good scientific method here, mate.

        Uhh… I’m not the one making claims that goes against common knowledge of aerodynamics and then not providing that data. So sure, wanting someone to prove their claim makes me bad at scientific method…?? Maybe the people defending bullshit claims are the ones you should be calling out, oh wait that you yourself. Give you head a fucking shake lmfao.

        source
    • KidnappedByKitties@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      You’re right to be sceptical until more data is presented, but saying no claim of progress is ever true is quite obviously a gross misrepresentation of our current reality. You are doing this on digital devices interconnected with millions of users ar staggering speed and latency. Every part of which are scientific claims.

      source

      • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        Every blame where they omit the actual data to support the claim is never fully true. Provide the CFM testing data they must have to even make that claim.

        There is no valid reason to omit that data unless to mislead.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• xenspidey@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  You being downvoted is pretty crazy… Your statement is valid

  source
• KidnappedByKitties@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  There’s a relevant physics anomaly called a Helmholtz resonator, or more broadly waveform interference.

  source
• Natanael@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Destructive interference is a thing. The energy m the vibrations doesn’t go away, however you CAN shift that energy into different frequencies and destructive interference done correctly will effectively shift it into so high frequencies that the vibrations are better compared with heat than with sound (what is heat convection if not extremely high frequency sound? :)

  source

  • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    Even increasing or decreasing the length of the discharge tube will change its power and CFM and they’ve added 8”. There is no way the aerodynamics and the overall performance isn’t affected.

    source