Miles Batty 3:49.20 mile!!

bangalangadanga wrote:

simple physics

-everyone knows heavy things fall faster.

Maybe not wrote:

Isaac Newton did not agree with this statement.

In fact, neither did Galileo

The rest of the story wrote:

If you factored in friction I'm pretty sure they would.

If the statement was "bigger things fall faster" you'd have a point. But two objects of the same size/shape and different weights will fall at the same speed, unless they have specific aerodynamic properties (like a feather or a sheet of paper) that make them move laterally.

bangalangadanga wrote:

simple physics

-everyone knows heavy things fall faster.

Maybe not wrote:

Isaac Newton did not agree with this statement.

In fact, neither did Galileo

Both Newton and Galileo were liars.

Go ahead, drop a feather and a rock and see which one falls faster.

And don't give me no guff about air resistance. Birds are covered with feathers and they're not slowed down by air resistance.

Man, that was a solid 8/10 until you threw in the comment about the birds. The trick is to start out with the more ridiculous statement, so that you incite the compulsive, angry response, and then finish with something somewhat reasonable, so that it seems like you're being serious.

Bad Wigins wrote:

bangalangadanga wrote:

simple physics

-everyone knows heavy things fall faster.

Maybe not wrote:

Isaac Newton did not agree with this statement.

In fact, neither did Galileo

Both Newton and Galileo were liars.

Go ahead, drop a feather and a rock and see which one falls faster.

And don't give me no guff about air resistance. Birds are covered with feathers and they're not slowed down by air resistance.

miles batty knocked me off the top-ten list at byu with his 3:54 indoor time which, i believe, is far superior to today's downhill 3:49. and i am happy to report, i have beaten mike boit in an indoor mile back in 1983! just sayin'...:)

race video:

http://www.nzrun.com/video/703294-Mens-Elite-Mile-Queen-Street-Mile-2013

blzeeebub wrote:

What were the conditions for the race? Cold/humid/wet/windy?

Also, since it's a point-to-point course, wind speed and direction are important. The 3:28 guy may have been propelled forward by a strong, favorable wind. Any wind data?

I ran in the under 20s race, conditions were pretty solid, a little humid which is usual for Auckland, and virtually zero wind.

Plus the main difference as people mentioned is that the course is significantly different. there was about 400m flat at the end, and nowhere near as steep at the start.

hold the phone wrote:

If the statement was "bigger things fall faster" you'd have a point. But two objects of the same size/shape and different weights will fall at the same speed, unless they have specific aerodynamic properties (like a feather or a sheet of paper) that make them move laterally.

Are you saying that if you stood on top of a high diving board in a swimming pool and dropped two balls, one empty and one full of cement, they would both hit the water at the same time?

Yes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mCC-68LyZM

If one object/person is taller than the other (taller really is in reference to the center of mass) they will be moving faster when they reach the ground.

Drag forces don't depend on mass, they depend on speed and shape.

Getting back on topic....

What kind of elevation drop would enable a mediocre 4:30ish miler to go sub four? And what would be the best surface? Where can such a hill (or race) be found?

Downhill racer wrote:

Getting back on topic....

What kind of elevation drop would enable a mediocre 4:30ish miler to go sub four? And what would be the best surface? Where can such a hill (or race) be found?

Obligatory: