Kepler vs. Ohm
Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion:
1. The orbit of every planet is an ellipse with the sun at one of the foci. An ellipse is characterized by its two focal points. Thus, Kepler rejected the ancient Aristotelean and Ptolemaic and Copernican belief in circular motion.
2. A line joining a planet and the sun sweeps out equal areas during equal intervals of time as the planet travels along its orbit. This means that the planet travels faster while close to the sun and slows down when it is farther from the sun. With his law, Kepler destroyed the Aristotelean astronomical theory that planets have uniform velocity.
3. The squares of the orbital periods of planets are directly proportional to the cubes of the semi-major axes (the "half-length" of the ellipse) of their orbits. This means not only that larger orbits have longer periods, but also that the speed of a planet in a larger orbit is lower than in a smaller orbit. His third law is based on the foundation left by Copernicus, because he uses a mathematical expression to show the correlation between T (time for one revolution) and D (distance from the sun).
Ohm's law states that, in an electrical circuit, the current passing through a conductor between two points is proportional to the potential difference (i.e. voltage drop or voltage) across the two points, and inversely proportional to the resistance between them. In mathematical terms, this is written as: V=IR
Monday, December 3, 2007
Semifinal 1
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Kepler, easy. More to follow as time permits.
Ohm wins hands down. While the sheer brute force of using a planet as a weapon has definite merit, the practical applications are lacking. After all, people collide with the planet earth all the time with little to no repercussions.
On the other hand, Ohm's law is succinct and practical. Before Kepler can even finish asking, "But why does 'I' stand for current?" Ohm has him holding two wires, having accurately calculated the voltage necessary to produce a deadly current through his heart, given the typical resistivity of the human body.
Put another way, consider what would happen if each law was repealed. Repeal Kepler's laws, and some astrologers and astronauts get a little confused, until they realize the math is easier with circular motion and they jump for joy. Repeal Ohm's law, and there is no way to conduct electrical current in the human body, instantly stopping everyone's heart and causing brain death.
karl, your blatant omission of facts pertinent to the understanding of the matter at hand leads me to believe that you must be in politics; you have my sympathies.
As you pointed out, people utilize Kepler's law all the time with little to no repercussions. Later you claim that with out ohm's law people would die, so people use it as much, if not more than kepler's law, with little to no repercussions.
You would have been better off arguing that those who are killed by using the planet as a weapon are trying to kill them selves, where as those electrocuted are caught, as it were unawares; making electricity more ninjaesque, and a better killer. However, this could lead to Ohms law killing itself, because as we all know "The purpose of the ninja is to flip out and kill people" and the electric ninja may not care who it kills. So this ends being a less effective argument. Again, Kepler wins.
Also, just as devolution does not occur genetically, it would not occur with these laws either. Repeal Keplers laws and if nothing is there to take its place we could all end up flying across space with out a star as a guide. This would kill us all. A repeal of ohms law would not kill us all. See, current in the human body is accomplished by ions, not electrons. For example, in the heart the current is composed of calcium and potassium ions flowing into and out of the cell respectively. Fick's laws of diffusion are much more relevant here, but he already lost.
Earth travels at ~30km/s. Electricity in the form of lightning, otherwise known as the coolest form of electricity, travels at ~60km/s. I think we can easily see that electricity wins over planetary motion is speed.
Pretty obvious why divine retribution is so often handed down by means of lightning bolts. Deific justice must be swift, after all, and planets are just too slow to get the job done.
Now, I realize that speed isn't everything in a fight. We should probably also consider destructive potential. To my knowledge, more people (not NASA space vehicles) have survived collisions with planets than survive lightning strikes, on average. Overall, more deaths are probably attributable to planetary collisions, but for the number of planetary collisions survived vs. the number of lightning strikes survived daily, I would say that lightning strikes are more likely to cause death.
Since this is a cage deathmatch, and cages conduct electricity, a nice bolt of lightning would fry old Kepler before he could even get Ohm in the path of some other planet's orbital ellipse.
This is a tough one. Similar to Newton v Einstein we have a very practical law paired against a very big, grandiose law with little to no bearing on day to day life.
But I think this one will turn out differently. Because where Einstein left himself vulnerable to being attacked Kepler brings a planetary body as a shield. So while Ohm is hurling lightning bolts and such at him, Kepler just keeps the planet moving forward against the onslaught, shrugging off such puny attacks, until in squishes Ohm into a paste not much thicker than one of his beloved electrons.
As for tommy's foolish suggestion of electrifying the cage I must suggest that he Google "Faraday Cage".
Ok Kit - all Ohm would have to do is push Kepler into the ungrounded electrified cage. That'd do it.
Otherwise, all that would really happen is they would both be unable to get good cell phone signals, which I seriously doubt would harm either of them. However, loss of cellular communications would probably kill some modern teenagers and young college students...
And the cage would only be one way electricity could be conducted. The source could be internal, and therefore the ungrounded, electrified cage would be plenty harmful. Besides, if Ohm is focus-firing bolts of lightning from within the cage, Kepler would be hard-pressed to get one of his planets to respond fast enough for it to matter.
Changing the trajectory of a planet is definitely not something Kepler could do. All he could do is try to get other people to get in the way. Facilitated electrocution is much simpler.
Some of you are missing the point. This is not a contest of whose laws can be used to kill people in gruesome yet comical ways. It is a contest of the contribution to humanity that each of these laws has made.
What is really at issue is what has the discovery of these laws done for us? Kepler's laws overturned a long-held assumption- that celestial bodies move in circular orbits. Any sort of debunking of pre-scientific astrological/alchemical/natural philosophic nonsense is a winner in my book.
The there's Ohm. While Ohm's law lets us build some useful electronic devices, very few people understand it. It's part of the section in Intro to Physics that deals with electricity, where none of the variable names make any sense, none of the equations mean anything, and everyone just learns it all by rote to get a begrudged B. It's pretty obvious to anyone with a science background that the sum total of human suffering caused by attempting to learn Ohm's Law and it's cousins far outweighs the benefit to humanity of cell phones and the electric chair.
Score one for Kepler.
It is always annoying when you like and respect the arguments made by those you disagree with, and dislike and mock the arguments of those that agree with you. But here goes:
tommy, I concede that Ohm could work around the shielding effects of the cage, and I agree that moving planetry objects is not an easy thing. But I'm still going with Kepler on this one. Like Einstein in the last fight - I can totally see Ohm being able to pull of the win, but I just don't think that's what will actually happen.
nick, you chose the same answer as me, but for all the wrong reasons. This is not a contest of who made the biggest contribution to humanity - this is a cage match between the laws. Look at it this way, if the fight were between Mother Theresa (pre-death) and Mr. T I'd vote for Mr. T. Not because I think he's done more for the world, but because I think he could win a cage fight with a rabid pit bull - let alone a little old lady. And even by your own logic Ohm has done more for the world. Kepler gives us Google Earth and satalite radio. Ohm gives us TV, microwaves, pace makers, computers, and RC cars.
I like Ohm better, but I think Kepler wins in the cage.
Post a Comment