WEBVTT - Why do planes fly?

0:00:05.920 --> 0:00:11.479
<v Speaker 1>They say that any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from magic. Well,

0:00:11.520 --> 0:00:15.400
<v Speaker 1>there's one technology that people have lusted after for thousands

0:00:15.440 --> 0:00:18.920
<v Speaker 1>of years that we now rely on even find routine.

0:00:19.400 --> 0:00:22.560
<v Speaker 1>I'm talking, of course, about flight. It's been only one

0:00:22.640 --> 0:00:25.639
<v Speaker 1>hundred years since people were able to leave the ground

0:00:25.680 --> 0:00:29.120
<v Speaker 1>and fly through the air and return safely. Now it's

0:00:29.160 --> 0:00:32.440
<v Speaker 1>so routine that people sleep through it. But imagine what

0:00:32.479 --> 0:00:34.879
<v Speaker 1>that would seem like someone from a thousand or ten

0:00:34.920 --> 0:00:38.879
<v Speaker 1>thousand years ago. It's essentially like magic. Of course, we

0:00:39.040 --> 0:00:42.720
<v Speaker 1>know it's actually not. It's science because we can understand it,

0:00:42.760 --> 0:00:44.800
<v Speaker 1>and we can break it down. We can explain it.

0:00:45.040 --> 0:00:49.199
<v Speaker 1>We understand why planes fly, right, do we could we

0:00:49.240 --> 0:00:52.400
<v Speaker 1>actually explain it to visiting ancestors from the deep past?

0:00:52.960 --> 0:00:55.320
<v Speaker 1>Or is it still some kind of black magic even

0:00:55.360 --> 0:00:59.920
<v Speaker 1>for modern humans and the best aeronautical engineers. So today

0:01:00.080 --> 0:01:03.400
<v Speaker 1>on Daniel and Kelly's Extraordinary Universe, we'll be asking an

0:01:03.440 --> 0:01:06.360
<v Speaker 1>old question, why do planes fly?

0:01:20.280 --> 0:01:20.480
<v Speaker 2>Hi?

0:01:20.760 --> 0:01:23.280
<v Speaker 3>I'm Kelly Wiener Smith and my favorite way to travel

0:01:23.400 --> 0:01:23.959
<v Speaker 3>is by train.

0:01:24.520 --> 0:01:27.640
<v Speaker 1>Hi. I'm Daniel Whitson. I'm a particle physicist, which means

0:01:27.680 --> 0:01:29.200
<v Speaker 1>I have to fly around the world to get to

0:01:29.240 --> 0:01:31.320
<v Speaker 1>the biggest particle accelerator.

0:01:31.080 --> 0:01:33.399
<v Speaker 4>And what is your worst flight experience?

0:01:35.680 --> 0:01:39.399
<v Speaker 1>My worst flight experience is traveling with my own six

0:01:39.480 --> 0:01:42.319
<v Speaker 1>month old baby. We had a bascinet and we got

0:01:42.319 --> 0:01:44.360
<v Speaker 1>her to sleep in the basinet and we thought, oh,

0:01:44.400 --> 0:01:47.040
<v Speaker 1>this is going to be great. Then the stewardess came

0:01:47.080 --> 0:01:48.920
<v Speaker 1>by and said, oh, there's some turbulence. You have to

0:01:48.960 --> 0:01:50.920
<v Speaker 1>take her out and put her in a seat and

0:01:50.960 --> 0:01:54.640
<v Speaker 1>buckle her in. And he said, no, she's sleeping, and

0:01:54.720 --> 0:01:57.800
<v Speaker 1>she said sorry, it's the rules. And everyone around us went,

0:01:58.160 --> 0:02:01.120
<v Speaker 1>oh no, and they were right, because she screamed for

0:02:01.160 --> 0:02:02.400
<v Speaker 1>the rest of the eight hour flight.

0:02:02.800 --> 0:02:06.360
<v Speaker 3>Oh no, that's horrible. I'm so sorry. When you finally

0:02:06.360 --> 0:02:08.320
<v Speaker 3>get your kid asleep and something wakes them up on

0:02:08.360 --> 0:02:09.440
<v Speaker 3>a plane, it's the worst.

0:02:09.880 --> 0:02:12.160
<v Speaker 1>It's the worst. And everybody knew it was the worst,

0:02:12.200 --> 0:02:14.480
<v Speaker 1>and we all knew there's nothing we could do, but hey,

0:02:14.560 --> 0:02:17.320
<v Speaker 1>you know, them's the rules. How about you, what's your

0:02:17.360 --> 0:02:18.720
<v Speaker 1>worst traveled experience?

0:02:18.880 --> 0:02:22.120
<v Speaker 3>It also involves plane with my child. She was probably

0:02:22.160 --> 0:02:25.400
<v Speaker 3>about six months old around there also, and I brought

0:02:25.440 --> 0:02:27.600
<v Speaker 3>a change of clothes for her. I was totally prepared

0:02:27.639 --> 0:02:29.720
<v Speaker 3>for her. She was sitting on my lap and we

0:02:29.720 --> 0:02:32.320
<v Speaker 3>were about to take off, and right as the plane

0:02:32.320 --> 0:02:35.280
<v Speaker 3>started moving forward, she had a blowout poop on my

0:02:35.360 --> 0:02:39.760
<v Speaker 3>leg and so it smelled horrible. But you can't get

0:02:39.800 --> 0:02:43.280
<v Speaker 3>out of your seat until you rechruising altitude. So everybody

0:02:43.320 --> 0:02:45.880
<v Speaker 3>was like giving me dirty looks and covering their noses,

0:02:46.240 --> 0:02:48.519
<v Speaker 3>and it took like twenty minutes before we were allowed

0:02:48.560 --> 0:02:50.320
<v Speaker 3>to get out of our seats. And then you know,

0:02:50.360 --> 0:02:53.239
<v Speaker 3>I had to change her in the airplane changing room,

0:02:53.280 --> 0:02:55.800
<v Speaker 3>which is like so tiny, I thought she was gonna

0:02:55.800 --> 0:02:57.959
<v Speaker 3>fall off the little tray. And anyway, I brought a

0:02:58.040 --> 0:02:59.760
<v Speaker 3>change of clothes for her, but I didn't assume i'd

0:02:59.760 --> 0:03:01.000
<v Speaker 3>have on my pants.

0:03:01.000 --> 0:03:04.280
<v Speaker 1>Oops. Classic parenting mistake exactly.

0:03:04.360 --> 0:03:06.760
<v Speaker 3>So I smelled horrible the whole flight, and people kept

0:03:06.760 --> 0:03:08.600
<v Speaker 3>looking at me, and it wasn't a lot of fun.

0:03:08.639 --> 0:03:11.480
<v Speaker 4>But them's the breaks you got to leave the house

0:03:11.520 --> 0:03:11.920
<v Speaker 4>with kids.

0:03:11.919 --> 0:03:13.840
<v Speaker 1>Sometimes you just got to look back at those people

0:03:13.840 --> 0:03:17.000
<v Speaker 1>and say, hey, who's going to pay for your social security? Right?

0:03:17.280 --> 0:03:21.120
<v Speaker 1>Somebody's got to make the next generation. And to me,

0:03:21.440 --> 0:03:25.440
<v Speaker 1>Madame poopy Pants, I'll get a.

0:03:25.360 --> 0:03:26.800
<v Speaker 4>Little like badge that says that.

0:03:27.840 --> 0:03:29.960
<v Speaker 3>Now, whenever I see a parent with a kid, I'm like,

0:03:30.160 --> 0:03:31.959
<v Speaker 3>what can I carry for you. How can I help

0:03:32.000 --> 0:03:33.720
<v Speaker 3>like I offer to help all the time.

0:03:34.240 --> 0:03:37.160
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, exactly. And the big lesson I learned is never judge,

0:03:37.280 --> 0:03:39.120
<v Speaker 1>and you never in somebody else's family. You don't know

0:03:39.120 --> 0:03:41.760
<v Speaker 1>what they're going through or what they're struggling with or

0:03:41.760 --> 0:03:44.880
<v Speaker 1>how much they slept last night. Just help and smile. Yep.

0:03:44.920 --> 0:03:47.120
<v Speaker 3>And kids are always at their worst because they're always

0:03:47.120 --> 0:03:49.160
<v Speaker 3>the tiredest and they're not used to it, and so

0:03:49.440 --> 0:03:52.800
<v Speaker 3>like anyway, yes, don't judge. But planes are wonderful. I

0:03:52.880 --> 0:03:54.720
<v Speaker 3>needed to get from place to place, and I needed

0:03:54.720 --> 0:03:56.800
<v Speaker 3>to get there quickly. And actually I wouldn't have wanted

0:03:56.840 --> 0:03:58.600
<v Speaker 3>to take my daughter on a long train ride for

0:03:58.640 --> 0:04:00.280
<v Speaker 3>the journey that we were going on, because it would

0:04:00.280 --> 0:04:03.480
<v Speaker 3>have been days. But I was flying to London the

0:04:03.520 --> 0:04:06.040
<v Speaker 3>other day and we had kind of talked about why

0:04:06.040 --> 0:04:08.680
<v Speaker 3>do planes fly? And you said it's complicated, And while

0:04:08.720 --> 0:04:12.120
<v Speaker 3>I was, you know, above the Atlantic, I thought, how complicated?

0:04:13.240 --> 0:04:14.720
<v Speaker 4>How well do we understand this?

0:04:14.840 --> 0:04:17.160
<v Speaker 3>I hope the answer is really well, So I'm looking

0:04:17.160 --> 0:04:18.360
<v Speaker 3>forward to today's conversation.

0:04:18.680 --> 0:04:21.440
<v Speaker 1>Good Well. This question actually came to me from a listener.

0:04:21.520 --> 0:04:25.000
<v Speaker 1>Tom Johnson from Ohio wrote to me and asked if

0:04:25.040 --> 0:04:28.520
<v Speaker 1>we could explain why planes fly because he looked into

0:04:28.560 --> 0:04:31.120
<v Speaker 1>a little bit and he was kind of confused. So

0:04:31.160 --> 0:04:34.279
<v Speaker 1>he wanted a clear explanation for why it is that

0:04:34.360 --> 0:04:35.720
<v Speaker 1>planes stay in the air.

0:04:36.200 --> 0:04:38.080
<v Speaker 3>And if you have a question that you want to

0:04:38.080 --> 0:04:40.160
<v Speaker 3>ask us, we would be happy to answer them. So

0:04:40.240 --> 0:04:43.359
<v Speaker 3>send us an email at questions at Daniel and Kelly

0:04:43.480 --> 0:04:44.080
<v Speaker 3>dot org.

0:04:44.400 --> 0:04:45.760
<v Speaker 1>When I told Tom that we were going to answer

0:04:45.839 --> 0:04:48.040
<v Speaker 1>his question on the pod, he said, quote, my wife

0:04:48.080 --> 0:04:50.240
<v Speaker 1>is absolutely going to roll her eyes tonight when I

0:04:50.279 --> 0:04:53.760
<v Speaker 1>tell her over sushi, which made me wonder. Tom is

0:04:53.800 --> 0:04:56.520
<v Speaker 1>in Ohio. Where is he getting a sushi? Probably they

0:04:56.520 --> 0:04:59.560
<v Speaker 1>have it flown in so even his sushi relies on

0:04:59.600 --> 0:05:00.520
<v Speaker 1>airplane in wings.

0:05:01.040 --> 0:05:03.680
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, and you know, I lived in Ohio for a

0:05:03.720 --> 0:05:05.960
<v Speaker 3>decade or more, and I can tell you that when

0:05:06.000 --> 0:05:07.919
<v Speaker 3>sushi has to fly that far, it's not great.

0:05:10.040 --> 0:05:11.239
<v Speaker 4>You're too far from the ocean.

0:05:11.279 --> 0:05:13.880
<v Speaker 1>At that point, you're saying nobody should fly to Ohio

0:05:13.920 --> 0:05:14.440
<v Speaker 1>for sushi.

0:05:14.640 --> 0:05:15.280
<v Speaker 4>No, I'd say that.

0:05:15.320 --> 0:05:17.039
<v Speaker 3>I'm going to go on the record saying you shouldn't

0:05:17.040 --> 0:05:18.520
<v Speaker 3>fly just to Ohio for sushi.

0:05:18.520 --> 0:05:20.120
<v Speaker 4>Ohio has got other things going for it.

0:05:20.440 --> 0:05:22.800
<v Speaker 1>You should have Ohio pride. You know, I know you're

0:05:22.800 --> 0:05:25.680
<v Speaker 1>a transplanted Virginian, but like you come from Ohio. A

0:05:25.720 --> 0:05:28.640
<v Speaker 1>good thing about Ohio, for example, is it made you You.

0:05:28.600 --> 0:05:30.560
<v Speaker 3>Know, I was actually born in New Jersey, which is

0:05:30.600 --> 0:05:35.480
<v Speaker 3>an even harder state to defend, but I do actually

0:05:35.480 --> 0:05:38.080
<v Speaker 3>love New Jersey and I will defend New Jersey. But

0:05:38.160 --> 0:05:40.440
<v Speaker 3>you know, Ohio was a very safe place to grow

0:05:40.520 --> 0:05:42.359
<v Speaker 3>up where I grew up, and so that's fine. And

0:05:42.400 --> 0:05:45.840
<v Speaker 3>I think Ohio has made the most astronauts, and so

0:05:45.920 --> 0:05:47.760
<v Speaker 3>you know, we all would make jokes about you know,

0:05:47.800 --> 0:05:49.520
<v Speaker 3>what is it about Ohio that makes you want to

0:05:49.520 --> 0:05:52.360
<v Speaker 3>get as far as possible away from this planet? And

0:05:52.960 --> 0:05:55.600
<v Speaker 3>I'm not sure if Ohio is still winning an astronaut production,

0:05:55.720 --> 0:05:57.440
<v Speaker 3>but it was at some point.

0:05:57.600 --> 0:06:00.440
<v Speaker 1>All right, well, let's stop flying around the issue and

0:06:00.560 --> 0:06:02.880
<v Speaker 1>get to the question. I was wondering what people out

0:06:02.920 --> 0:06:05.640
<v Speaker 1>there thought about how planes stay in the air, how

0:06:05.680 --> 0:06:08.440
<v Speaker 1>wings work, what stories they had been told, and what

0:06:08.520 --> 0:06:11.800
<v Speaker 1>they understood about this question. So, as usual, I went

0:06:11.880 --> 0:06:14.720
<v Speaker 1>to our bank of volunteers to ask them why do

0:06:14.800 --> 0:06:17.040
<v Speaker 1>planes fly? If you would like to play for a

0:06:17.080 --> 0:06:19.080
<v Speaker 1>future episodes, please don't be shy right to us to

0:06:19.240 --> 0:06:23.479
<v Speaker 1>questions at Danielankelly dot org. In the meantime, think about

0:06:23.520 --> 0:06:25.960
<v Speaker 1>it for a moment. Why do you think planes fly?

0:06:26.520 --> 0:06:28.520
<v Speaker 1>Here's what a bunch of listeners had to say.

0:06:29.160 --> 0:06:32.120
<v Speaker 5>I believe nobody really knows. I would be glad to

0:06:32.240 --> 0:06:36.039
<v Speaker 5>learn otherwise. I know that I've read in my school

0:06:36.040 --> 0:06:38.359
<v Speaker 5>book that the air takes a longer way on the

0:06:38.360 --> 0:06:40.240
<v Speaker 5>top of the wing than on the bottom of the wing,

0:06:40.360 --> 0:06:43.080
<v Speaker 5>and therefore we have a sort of suction going on

0:06:43.120 --> 0:06:44.120
<v Speaker 5>that pulls the wing up.

0:06:44.360 --> 0:06:48.240
<v Speaker 1>Planes fly because they want to, and because of the

0:06:48.480 --> 0:06:49.760
<v Speaker 1>differential air.

0:06:49.600 --> 0:06:55.039
<v Speaker 6>Pressure forces the air to take a longer path to

0:06:55.160 --> 0:06:59.000
<v Speaker 6>go over the wing versus under the wing, and this

0:06:59.240 --> 0:07:04.719
<v Speaker 6>differential in the path length reduces the pressure on the

0:07:04.800 --> 0:07:08.720
<v Speaker 6>upper surface of the wing, and that provides lift.

0:07:09.400 --> 0:07:14.920
<v Speaker 1>There's some confusion surrounding the Bernoulli effect and the airflow

0:07:15.280 --> 0:07:18.520
<v Speaker 1>speed over the top and bottom of the wings. There's lift,

0:07:19.080 --> 0:07:22.240
<v Speaker 1>which means that the air going over the curved part

0:07:22.240 --> 0:07:24.720
<v Speaker 1>of the wing takes longer than the air going underneath

0:07:24.760 --> 0:07:26.680
<v Speaker 1>the wing, so the lift is created there.

0:07:26.960 --> 0:07:29.120
<v Speaker 2>It takes longer for the air to go over the

0:07:29.160 --> 0:07:29.800
<v Speaker 2>top of the wing.

0:07:30.120 --> 0:07:34.280
<v Speaker 6>The aerodynamics of that wing shape causes low pressure to

0:07:34.320 --> 0:07:37.960
<v Speaker 6>form over the top of the wing and high pressure

0:07:38.200 --> 0:07:39.720
<v Speaker 6>to form under the wing.

0:07:40.240 --> 0:07:44.160
<v Speaker 7>So wasn't it to do with Leonardo da Vinci came

0:07:44.240 --> 0:07:48.800
<v Speaker 7>up with the original idea to base planes on the

0:07:48.840 --> 0:07:50.880
<v Speaker 7>optron from wings of beds.

0:07:51.320 --> 0:07:53.880
<v Speaker 1>Planes fly because they can't swim.

0:07:56.040 --> 0:07:59.760
<v Speaker 2>I think that light blanes such as paper planes can

0:08:00.200 --> 0:08:05.360
<v Speaker 2>fly just because of hierodynamics, but heavy planes need engines

0:08:05.400 --> 0:08:08.640
<v Speaker 2>to generate pressure difference. But I am not entirely sure

0:08:08.680 --> 0:08:09.720
<v Speaker 2>how this works.

0:08:10.280 --> 0:08:12.880
<v Speaker 7>So you have to have thrust greater than drug and

0:08:13.080 --> 0:08:17.800
<v Speaker 7>lift greater than gravity, a higher pressure below and the

0:08:17.880 --> 0:08:21.200
<v Speaker 7>lower pressure above the top of the wing is curved,

0:08:21.640 --> 0:08:23.400
<v Speaker 7>so the air has to travel further.

0:08:24.440 --> 0:08:28.800
<v Speaker 8>I thought the planes flew because the Russian forts caused

0:08:29.160 --> 0:08:32.560
<v Speaker 8>air to flow over their wings and created a force

0:08:32.800 --> 0:08:34.679
<v Speaker 8>that pushes up on the wings.

0:08:35.559 --> 0:08:40.400
<v Speaker 2>So I think planes fly because of the way that

0:08:40.440 --> 0:08:42.520
<v Speaker 2>the wind dends around the wing.

0:08:43.440 --> 0:08:48.520
<v Speaker 6>Planes fly because the lift that they generate is greater

0:08:48.679 --> 0:08:50.160
<v Speaker 6>than the gravitational pull.

0:08:50.520 --> 0:08:51.800
<v Speaker 2>The air has.

0:08:51.640 --> 0:08:54.960
<v Speaker 4>A longer way over the wing than under the wing.

0:08:55.440 --> 0:08:58.320
<v Speaker 8>The top of the wing, because of its shape, it

0:08:58.440 --> 0:09:00.880
<v Speaker 8>makes a suction, so it's the plane up.

0:09:01.280 --> 0:09:04.920
<v Speaker 1>I'm not actually completely sure why plane flies, but I

0:09:04.960 --> 0:09:07.000
<v Speaker 1>know I've been in them and they tend to do that,

0:09:07.040 --> 0:09:08.480
<v Speaker 1>and I hope they continue to do so.

0:09:09.760 --> 0:09:12.440
<v Speaker 3>I love that the answers were a combination of people

0:09:12.480 --> 0:09:15.120
<v Speaker 3>who clearly sort of know what the answer is and

0:09:15.160 --> 0:09:18.640
<v Speaker 3>like gave good answers, and then people who are hilarious.

0:09:21.080 --> 0:09:24.559
<v Speaker 4>Because they can't swim. Made me laugh out loud. So bravo.

0:09:25.760 --> 0:09:27.520
<v Speaker 1>You know. I love that approach. You don't know the answer,

0:09:27.720 --> 0:09:28.720
<v Speaker 1>tell us a good joke.

0:09:29.000 --> 0:09:31.679
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, absolutely, I think that might be one of the

0:09:31.760 --> 0:09:32.400
<v Speaker 3>keys to life.

0:09:32.400 --> 0:09:34.240
<v Speaker 4>I think I.

0:09:34.200 --> 0:09:36.160
<v Speaker 1>Want to see that more of my physics exams. You know,

0:09:36.480 --> 0:09:39.000
<v Speaker 1>when somebody doesn't know how to solve this quantum mechanical

0:09:39.000 --> 0:09:41.360
<v Speaker 1>problemly write me a good joke. I'll give you some

0:09:41.400 --> 0:09:42.040
<v Speaker 1>points anyway.

0:09:42.280 --> 0:09:44.120
<v Speaker 4>You will give points for human sure.

0:09:44.200 --> 0:09:47.080
<v Speaker 1>Absolutely. I used to regularly have a question on exams

0:09:47.320 --> 0:09:49.679
<v Speaker 1>that was just a random New Yorker cartoon, and then

0:09:49.720 --> 0:09:52.720
<v Speaker 1>the question was, write a physics related caption for this cartoon.

0:09:53.440 --> 0:09:56.000
<v Speaker 4>Oh nice. I love that you're encouraging creativity.

0:09:56.640 --> 0:09:58.320
<v Speaker 3>I had an exam where I could get five extra

0:09:58.360 --> 0:10:00.400
<v Speaker 3>credit points if I drew a parasite, and you'd think

0:10:00.440 --> 0:10:02.640
<v Speaker 3>that that would be great, but I was like, I

0:10:02.679 --> 0:10:04.840
<v Speaker 3>hate this because I don't even do nice stick figures.

0:10:04.880 --> 0:10:06.960
<v Speaker 3>That's why I married an artist. He takes care of

0:10:07.000 --> 0:10:08.640
<v Speaker 3>all of it. But the good thing is there's a

0:10:08.679 --> 0:10:11.120
<v Speaker 3>stage of parasites where they essentially just look like a circle.

0:10:11.679 --> 0:10:15.959
<v Speaker 3>And so I just I said, oh, there's a medicinariosist done,

0:10:16.160 --> 0:10:17.360
<v Speaker 3>and I.

0:10:17.320 --> 0:10:20.400
<v Speaker 4>Didn't get full credit. All right, So where do we start?

0:10:20.760 --> 0:10:23.560
<v Speaker 1>So the beginning of the question of why planes fly

0:10:23.840 --> 0:10:26.320
<v Speaker 1>goes all the way back to the Right Brothers in

0:10:26.400 --> 0:10:30.000
<v Speaker 1>nineteen oh three. You know, the Right brothers. They were engineers,

0:10:30.040 --> 0:10:33.080
<v Speaker 1>they were not physicists. And so while the Right Brothers

0:10:33.400 --> 0:10:37.079
<v Speaker 1>made a plane fly, they actually didn't understand it at

0:10:37.120 --> 0:10:40.400
<v Speaker 1>the time. Like, they had no principles, they had no theory,

0:10:40.440 --> 0:10:43.000
<v Speaker 1>they had no real reason to think their plane was

0:10:43.080 --> 0:10:46.200
<v Speaker 1>gonna fly. They just kind of made it work. And

0:10:46.240 --> 0:10:49.120
<v Speaker 1>then they were showered, of course, with awards and fame

0:10:49.200 --> 0:10:51.400
<v Speaker 1>and all sorts of stuff, which led some people in

0:10:51.440 --> 0:10:53.720
<v Speaker 1>the physics community to get a little bit resentful.

0:10:53.920 --> 0:10:56.520
<v Speaker 3>So if they had no idea, why did they pick

0:10:56.640 --> 0:10:58.520
<v Speaker 3>the design they picked? Is it because they were building

0:10:58.520 --> 0:11:01.280
<v Speaker 3>on things that other people had made that maybe they

0:11:01.360 --> 0:11:03.280
<v Speaker 3>understood what they were doing, and so they just sort

0:11:03.280 --> 0:11:03.960
<v Speaker 3>of tinkered with that.

0:11:04.280 --> 0:11:06.720
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, engineering is a lot of tinkering, right, So let's

0:11:06.720 --> 0:11:09.280
<v Speaker 1>try this let's try that, and sometimes things work and

0:11:09.280 --> 0:11:12.280
<v Speaker 1>then later you figure out why that thing floats or

0:11:12.320 --> 0:11:15.319
<v Speaker 1>why does this thing fly? And that's essentially what happened

0:11:15.320 --> 0:11:18.360
<v Speaker 1>with the Wright brothers. And they won this fancy award

0:11:18.360 --> 0:11:21.640
<v Speaker 1>from the Aeronautical Society, and one physicist, Colonel Fullerton, wrote

0:11:21.679 --> 0:11:23.760
<v Speaker 1>it and said, quote, I think it was a mistake

0:11:23.800 --> 0:11:26.040
<v Speaker 1>of the Aeronautical Society giving the rights of metal for

0:11:26.080 --> 0:11:29.320
<v Speaker 1>their contribution to aeronautical science. I agree with they're having

0:11:29.360 --> 0:11:31.280
<v Speaker 1>the medal, but it should have been for what they

0:11:31.320 --> 0:11:34.200
<v Speaker 1>have done. In other words, they didn't understand it. They

0:11:34.200 --> 0:11:37.360
<v Speaker 1>didn't actually advance aeronautical science. They just sort of like

0:11:37.679 --> 0:11:39.880
<v Speaker 1>made it work, and they left open the question of

0:11:39.920 --> 0:11:41.559
<v Speaker 1>like why does this work.

0:11:41.640 --> 0:11:43.280
<v Speaker 3>I still feel like there should be a medal for

0:11:43.360 --> 0:11:45.880
<v Speaker 3>the moment when you're about to push your plane off

0:11:45.880 --> 0:11:49.520
<v Speaker 3>the cliff and you're like, we don't understand what's going on.

0:11:49.679 --> 0:11:53.280
<v Speaker 1>But he the Wiley Coyote Award or something.

0:11:53.559 --> 0:11:55.320
<v Speaker 4>Maybe it's a subset of the Darwin Award.

0:11:55.400 --> 0:11:58.840
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. And this turned out to be really important politically

0:11:58.960 --> 0:12:03.000
<v Speaker 1>because this is just before World War One, right, and

0:12:03.040 --> 0:12:06.319
<v Speaker 1>so World War one is beginning and we have nations

0:12:06.360 --> 0:12:08.800
<v Speaker 1>trying to figure out like how to make planes fly,

0:12:09.200 --> 0:12:12.280
<v Speaker 1>how to make them stable, and nobody really understood like

0:12:12.400 --> 0:12:15.199
<v Speaker 1>why some things work, how to make them better. And

0:12:15.320 --> 0:12:17.600
<v Speaker 1>if you don't have like a model for why planes fly,

0:12:17.679 --> 0:12:21.280
<v Speaker 1>it's pretty hard to improve their performance. And so just

0:12:21.280 --> 0:12:23.800
<v Speaker 1>before World War One you had all these folks in

0:12:23.840 --> 0:12:26.719
<v Speaker 1>Britain and then also on the continent trying to understand

0:12:26.760 --> 0:12:28.960
<v Speaker 1>the theory of flight so they could take advantage of

0:12:28.960 --> 0:12:29.720
<v Speaker 1>it militarily.

0:12:30.320 --> 0:12:33.560
<v Speaker 3>Okay, So the Right Brothers didn't have a theory, and

0:12:33.600 --> 0:12:35.880
<v Speaker 3>nobody else had a theory either, so everyone was just

0:12:35.920 --> 0:12:38.280
<v Speaker 3>tinkering to see how it worked and that it worked

0:12:38.280 --> 0:12:40.880
<v Speaker 3>for the Right Brothers. Did the fact that it worked

0:12:40.920 --> 0:12:44.080
<v Speaker 3>for the Right Brothers give insights into why it would work,

0:12:44.200 --> 0:12:47.520
<v Speaker 3>Like did their design work because it took advantages of

0:12:47.559 --> 0:12:50.599
<v Speaker 3>some physics principle that became obvious after the facts to

0:12:50.640 --> 0:12:51.440
<v Speaker 3>the physicists.

0:12:52.480 --> 0:12:55.120
<v Speaker 1>It certainly isn't obvious after the fact, because people are

0:12:55.160 --> 0:12:59.439
<v Speaker 1>still to this day arguing why planes fly. And it's

0:12:59.480 --> 0:13:01.800
<v Speaker 1>fascinating that the divide in the field we're going to

0:13:01.840 --> 0:13:04.160
<v Speaker 1>dig into this really goes back to the split that

0:13:04.240 --> 0:13:06.480
<v Speaker 1>happened in World War One, where you had the sort

0:13:06.480 --> 0:13:09.840
<v Speaker 1>of like mathematical battle between the scientists. You had the

0:13:09.840 --> 0:13:11.520
<v Speaker 1>British trying to figure it out and you had the

0:13:11.520 --> 0:13:14.400
<v Speaker 1>Germans trying to figure it out, and they took different approaches,

0:13:14.720 --> 0:13:17.560
<v Speaker 1>and those approaches still live on and do battle in

0:13:17.600 --> 0:13:21.080
<v Speaker 1>science today. In modern aeronautical engineering, the Germans took this

0:13:21.120 --> 0:13:23.520
<v Speaker 1>approach of thinking about airs a fluid flowing over the

0:13:23.520 --> 0:13:26.319
<v Speaker 1>wing and analyzing the velocity and thinking about the pressure.

0:13:26.480 --> 0:13:28.160
<v Speaker 1>But the British didn't like that approach. It made some

0:13:28.200 --> 0:13:31.880
<v Speaker 1>approximations that made them uncomfortable, and they like using Newton's forces, Newton,

0:13:31.960 --> 0:13:34.360
<v Speaker 1>of course being British, And so to this day we

0:13:34.400 --> 0:13:38.440
<v Speaker 1>have two competing theories for why planes fly and how

0:13:38.480 --> 0:13:40.480
<v Speaker 1>they work. It's fascinating to me that we still haven't

0:13:40.480 --> 0:13:42.679
<v Speaker 1>figured this out. You're right, we had a working example

0:13:42.679 --> 0:13:45.439
<v Speaker 1>about one hundred years ago, and that definitely helps, right,

0:13:45.480 --> 0:13:49.200
<v Speaker 1>It rules some things out, it inspires experiments, So having

0:13:49.200 --> 0:13:52.199
<v Speaker 1>a working example is useful, but it doesn't always tell

0:13:52.280 --> 0:13:54.160
<v Speaker 1>you exactly why something happens.

0:13:54.520 --> 0:13:56.520
<v Speaker 3>So are these theories, which I'm sure we'll get into

0:13:56.520 --> 0:13:59.839
<v Speaker 3>the details of in a second, are they different enough

0:14:00.320 --> 0:14:03.080
<v Speaker 3>that that resulted in the British and the Germans having

0:14:03.200 --> 0:14:06.200
<v Speaker 3>planes that had different shapes during World War One? Or

0:14:06.240 --> 0:14:09.600
<v Speaker 3>do both theories sort of predict that the same plane

0:14:09.679 --> 0:14:11.240
<v Speaker 3>shape is good.

0:14:11.800 --> 0:14:14.960
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, they make different predictions about what's important in the

0:14:15.040 --> 0:14:17.440
<v Speaker 1>shape of the wing, which is fascinating. And I found

0:14:17.480 --> 0:14:20.040
<v Speaker 1>this quote from a historian David Bloor who said, on

0:14:20.120 --> 0:14:22.360
<v Speaker 1>the eve of the Great War, none of the British

0:14:22.440 --> 0:14:25.320
<v Speaker 1>workers in the field of aero dynamics had any workable

0:14:25.320 --> 0:14:27.760
<v Speaker 1>account of how an airplane could get off the ground,

0:14:28.480 --> 0:14:30.960
<v Speaker 1>which you know, makes it pretty hard to optimize the

0:14:31.000 --> 0:14:33.360
<v Speaker 1>performance of your warplanes.

0:14:32.920 --> 0:14:35.400
<v Speaker 3>And pretty scary to get into a warplane on top

0:14:35.440 --> 0:14:37.280
<v Speaker 3>of all the reasons that it's scary to get into

0:14:37.320 --> 0:14:38.720
<v Speaker 3>a warplane exactly.

0:14:38.800 --> 0:14:42.080
<v Speaker 1>And later on we'll hear about Albert Einstein's personal design

0:14:42.240 --> 0:14:45.040
<v Speaker 1>for an airplane, which really didn't work very well.

0:14:46.520 --> 0:14:48.640
<v Speaker 3>So let's dig Should we start with the Germans or

0:14:48.680 --> 0:14:50.040
<v Speaker 3>should we start with the British.

0:14:50.080 --> 0:14:52.480
<v Speaker 1>So the German story is the one that most people

0:14:52.480 --> 0:14:55.240
<v Speaker 1>have heard about. It's this theory of fluids and flow

0:14:55.280 --> 0:14:58.040
<v Speaker 1>and Bernoulli's equations and all this kind of stuff. So

0:14:58.080 --> 0:14:59.680
<v Speaker 1>we should start with there to make contact with what

0:15:00.160 --> 0:15:02.000
<v Speaker 1>people think about when they think about flight.

0:15:02.520 --> 0:15:03.440
<v Speaker 4>All right, let's do that.

0:15:03.840 --> 0:15:06.520
<v Speaker 1>So the usual story for why plane flies has to

0:15:06.520 --> 0:15:09.800
<v Speaker 1>do with the shape of the wing, and so aeronautical

0:15:09.800 --> 0:15:12.800
<v Speaker 1>engineers call this an airfoil. It's round y in the

0:15:12.800 --> 0:15:14.680
<v Speaker 1>front and it's point d in the back. It's sort

0:15:14.680 --> 0:15:18.280
<v Speaker 1>of like a long, thin tear drop. Right. The idea

0:15:18.640 --> 0:15:21.120
<v Speaker 1>that you're usually told is that the shape of this

0:15:21.280 --> 0:15:24.720
<v Speaker 1>wing creates a pressure difference, that you have lower pressure

0:15:24.760 --> 0:15:27.520
<v Speaker 1>above the wing and higher pressure below the wing, and

0:15:27.560 --> 0:15:30.760
<v Speaker 1>that creates lyft because higher pressure below and lower pressure

0:15:30.760 --> 0:15:34.440
<v Speaker 1>above basically pushes up on the wing. And it's the

0:15:34.480 --> 0:15:37.800
<v Speaker 1>shape of the wing that's crucial in creating these pressure differences,

0:15:38.000 --> 0:15:41.160
<v Speaker 1>which is what creates lyft. So that's the usual story

0:15:41.400 --> 0:15:44.120
<v Speaker 1>for why planes fly. That comes down to this particular

0:15:44.200 --> 0:15:45.080
<v Speaker 1>shape of the wing.

0:15:45.520 --> 0:15:49.160
<v Speaker 3>So you've got this curved edge moving towards the air quickly.

0:15:50.160 --> 0:15:54.160
<v Speaker 3>Why does that shape not create the same amount of

0:15:54.160 --> 0:15:55.840
<v Speaker 3>pressure on the top as it does on the bottom.

0:15:55.840 --> 0:15:58.320
<v Speaker 3>Because that shape is like symmetrical, right is it? Because

0:15:58.320 --> 0:16:00.520
<v Speaker 3>when it goes over, it has more space to sort

0:16:00.520 --> 0:16:01.240
<v Speaker 3>of spread out.

0:16:01.440 --> 0:16:04.400
<v Speaker 1>So the shape is not actually symmetrical. Right. Typically it's

0:16:04.440 --> 0:16:07.520
<v Speaker 1>like flat on the bottom and more curved on the top,

0:16:08.160 --> 0:16:10.680
<v Speaker 1>and so the shape is not actually symmetrical. Which is

0:16:10.680 --> 0:16:13.080
<v Speaker 1>why the Bernoulli story tells you that it pushes up.

0:16:13.240 --> 0:16:15.400
<v Speaker 1>Bernoulli is a guy in the seventeen hundreds who is

0:16:15.400 --> 0:16:18.920
<v Speaker 1>thinking about fluid flow and mostly about like water through

0:16:18.960 --> 0:16:22.000
<v Speaker 1>pipes and pressure and volume and like, fluids are still

0:16:22.080 --> 0:16:25.600
<v Speaker 1>something we're struggling to understand. But Bernoulli had a simplified

0:16:25.800 --> 0:16:28.200
<v Speaker 1>view of it, which oiler actually came through later and

0:16:28.320 --> 0:16:31.160
<v Speaker 1>proved all of his equations for him. But Bernoulli's principle

0:16:31.160 --> 0:16:34.440
<v Speaker 1>tells us that faster moving fluids have lower pressure and

0:16:34.520 --> 0:16:37.680
<v Speaker 1>slower moving fluids have higher pressure. So if the shape

0:16:37.680 --> 0:16:39.760
<v Speaker 1>of the wing as it moves through the air makes

0:16:39.800 --> 0:16:43.120
<v Speaker 1>the air go slower under the wing and faster above

0:16:43.160 --> 0:16:46.200
<v Speaker 1>the wing on this curved shape, then that'll generate lower

0:16:46.200 --> 0:16:48.800
<v Speaker 1>pressure above the wing and higher pressure below the wing,

0:16:49.200 --> 0:16:50.480
<v Speaker 1>and that gives you lift.

0:16:50.920 --> 0:16:53.240
<v Speaker 3>And that feels easy to test, right because you just

0:16:53.240 --> 0:16:56.960
<v Speaker 3>flip the wing over and it should do the opposite, right,

0:16:57.160 --> 0:16:59.120
<v Speaker 3>like it should send you plummeting downwards.

0:17:00.440 --> 0:17:03.440
<v Speaker 1>Yes, already you're identifying a problem with this, But before

0:17:03.480 --> 0:17:06.040
<v Speaker 1>we take this explanation apart, let's do a little bit

0:17:06.040 --> 0:17:08.119
<v Speaker 1>more to support it. Because you're right, it kind of

0:17:08.200 --> 0:17:09.959
<v Speaker 1>is easy to test and you can do a simple

0:17:10.000 --> 0:17:12.160
<v Speaker 1>test at home. You can just like take a piece

0:17:12.200 --> 0:17:15.159
<v Speaker 1>of paper and blow air above the piece of paper,

0:17:15.480 --> 0:17:17.080
<v Speaker 1>and what you see is the paper goes from being

0:17:17.160 --> 0:17:19.080
<v Speaker 1>sort of droopy to being flat, so it sort of

0:17:19.080 --> 0:17:21.879
<v Speaker 1>like lifts up. And so it's like a classic symbol

0:17:21.920 --> 0:17:24.920
<v Speaker 1>at home demonstration. Which you're doing is you're increasing the

0:17:25.000 --> 0:17:27.720
<v Speaker 1>velocity of the air above the paper, which in theory

0:17:28.040 --> 0:17:31.400
<v Speaker 1>lowers the air pressure above the paper, which provides lift

0:17:31.400 --> 0:17:33.679
<v Speaker 1>because now the pressure is higher below the paper and

0:17:33.760 --> 0:17:36.600
<v Speaker 1>lower above the paper. And you know, the story of

0:17:36.760 --> 0:17:39.880
<v Speaker 1>like the air moves faster over the wing and slower

0:17:39.920 --> 0:17:43.320
<v Speaker 1>below the wing is also verified in lots of other experiments,

0:17:43.359 --> 0:17:46.520
<v Speaker 1>Like you can do these smoke tests where essentially you

0:17:46.520 --> 0:17:48.800
<v Speaker 1>put a wing in a wind tunnel. Instead of just

0:17:48.840 --> 0:17:51.720
<v Speaker 1>blowing air over it, you blow smoke over it. Smoke

0:17:51.840 --> 0:17:53.760
<v Speaker 1>just being like a bunch of particles. You can track

0:17:53.800 --> 0:17:56.880
<v Speaker 1>those particles and you can measure the velocity. So basically

0:17:57.119 --> 0:17:59.359
<v Speaker 1>measure the velocity of the air around the wing. See

0:17:59.359 --> 0:18:02.359
<v Speaker 1>what happened, right, don't just like talk about it, you know,

0:18:02.440 --> 0:18:05.160
<v Speaker 1>in your salons while you're smoking cigarettes or whatever. Actually

0:18:05.200 --> 0:18:08.040
<v Speaker 1>figure it out. And this is verified, like wind tunnels

0:18:08.040 --> 0:18:10.240
<v Speaker 1>and smoke tests tell us that the air does move

0:18:10.320 --> 0:18:13.360
<v Speaker 1>faster over the top of the wing than below the wing,

0:18:13.480 --> 0:18:16.000
<v Speaker 1>And so this seems like it all sort of comes together,

0:18:16.480 --> 0:18:20.399
<v Speaker 1>but as you identify, there are some important limitations to

0:18:20.600 --> 0:18:22.680
<v Speaker 1>this explanation of why planes fly.

0:18:23.400 --> 0:18:26.040
<v Speaker 3>So when you get a window seat near the wing

0:18:26.520 --> 0:18:28.920
<v Speaker 3>and you look out, it's easier to see like it's

0:18:28.960 --> 0:18:30.840
<v Speaker 3>bunching up and it gets a little bit like kind

0:18:30.840 --> 0:18:34.159
<v Speaker 3>of white ish. Is that pressure forming? Like are you

0:18:34.200 --> 0:18:36.000
<v Speaker 3>sort of bunching up the air molecules to the point

0:18:36.000 --> 0:18:39.480
<v Speaker 3>where they're visible or something else happening there? Or am

0:18:39.480 --> 0:18:41.200
<v Speaker 3>I imagining it? And this is like an episode of

0:18:41.240 --> 0:18:42.680
<v Speaker 3>the Twilight Zone.

0:18:43.480 --> 0:18:46.159
<v Speaker 1>Nobody else sees that, Kelly, Yeah, exactly, it's just you.

0:18:46.520 --> 0:18:47.920
<v Speaker 4>That was such a great episode.

0:18:48.280 --> 0:18:48.800
<v Speaker 1>I love that.

0:18:49.520 --> 0:18:49.680
<v Speaker 7>No.

0:18:49.800 --> 0:18:52.320
<v Speaker 1>I think what's happening there is you're seeing more water vapor.

0:18:52.520 --> 0:18:54.720
<v Speaker 1>There are definitely changes in the air pressure below and

0:18:54.720 --> 0:18:57.240
<v Speaker 1>above the wing, and as you know, water is very

0:18:57.240 --> 0:18:59.560
<v Speaker 1>sensitive to pressure, the vapor point and all this kind

0:18:59.560 --> 0:19:02.240
<v Speaker 1>of stuff. What you're seeing there is not the air itself,

0:19:02.240 --> 0:19:04.720
<v Speaker 1>but water vapor forming, which can show you, just like

0:19:04.760 --> 0:19:07.520
<v Speaker 1>any smoke tests can show you where the air is flowing.

0:19:07.560 --> 0:19:08.560
<v Speaker 1>So that is pretty cool.

0:19:08.920 --> 0:19:11.880
<v Speaker 4>That sounds obvious now that you say it. But why

0:19:11.880 --> 0:19:12.399
<v Speaker 4>did I ask that?

0:19:12.440 --> 0:19:15.359
<v Speaker 3>But whatever, that's fine, okay, So we decided now we're

0:19:15.400 --> 0:19:18.760
<v Speaker 3>going to talk about the limitations. Has anybody flipped the

0:19:18.800 --> 0:19:21.960
<v Speaker 3>wing the other way and then saw what happened?

0:19:22.200 --> 0:19:23.200
<v Speaker 4>Did that plane still fly?

0:19:24.160 --> 0:19:26.840
<v Speaker 1>So? Planes fly upside down all the time? Right? A

0:19:26.960 --> 0:19:30.240
<v Speaker 1>big problem with this explanation is that it predicts that

0:19:30.320 --> 0:19:32.840
<v Speaker 1>the asymmetry of the wing is crucial, right, that the

0:19:32.960 --> 0:19:35.440
<v Speaker 1>curb bit on the top compared to the flat bottom

0:19:35.720 --> 0:19:37.840
<v Speaker 1>is really important for making a lift. And so it

0:19:37.840 --> 0:19:39.879
<v Speaker 1>predicts that if you flip that over, planes should like

0:19:40.040 --> 0:19:42.960
<v Speaker 1>crash to the ground. Right, that an upside down wing

0:19:43.320 --> 0:19:46.760
<v Speaker 1>should have anti lift or should have net force downwards.

0:19:47.080 --> 0:19:49.600
<v Speaker 1>But we don't see that. You know, you can fly

0:19:49.680 --> 0:19:52.240
<v Speaker 1>planes upside down all the time. Everybody who's been to

0:19:52.280 --> 0:19:55.399
<v Speaker 1>like an aeronautics show has seen old fashioned planes or

0:19:55.440 --> 0:19:59.359
<v Speaker 1>new planes. They can fly upside down. So Bernoulli's equation

0:19:59.760 --> 0:20:03.040
<v Speaker 1>does and answered this question. This can't be the complete

0:20:03.080 --> 0:20:06.040
<v Speaker 1>story of why wings provide lyft because it gives the

0:20:06.080 --> 0:20:08.840
<v Speaker 1>wrong explanation or upside down planes.

0:20:09.160 --> 0:20:12.520
<v Speaker 3>So you mentioned that Eiler figured out all of these

0:20:12.520 --> 0:20:15.920
<v Speaker 3>equations to support Bernoulli. Does it turn out that Oiler's

0:20:15.920 --> 0:20:20.080
<v Speaker 3>equations were missing some important factor because the equation said

0:20:20.119 --> 0:20:21.360
<v Speaker 3>it should work, but then it doesn't work.

0:20:21.400 --> 0:20:22.800
<v Speaker 4>So what was missing in the equations?

0:20:23.160 --> 0:20:25.280
<v Speaker 1>Oh yeah, great question. And this really goes to the

0:20:25.280 --> 0:20:27.840
<v Speaker 1>heart of what's going on here. There's nothing wrong with

0:20:27.880 --> 0:20:31.720
<v Speaker 1>Bernoulli's equations. And I'm giving Oiler credit only because Oiler

0:20:31.760 --> 0:20:34.000
<v Speaker 1>came along and like did all the math BERNEULLI had

0:20:34.040 --> 0:20:35.919
<v Speaker 1>like these leaps of insight, like oh, I think this

0:20:36.000 --> 0:20:38.159
<v Speaker 1>and that and the other thing, and then Oiler came

0:20:38.200 --> 0:20:40.560
<v Speaker 1>along and actually like dotted all the i's and crossed

0:20:40.560 --> 0:20:42.720
<v Speaker 1>all the t's. And I think Oiler would have gotten

0:20:42.760 --> 0:20:45.280
<v Speaker 1>credit for these equations if he hadn't already gotten credit

0:20:45.320 --> 0:20:48.320
<v Speaker 1>for like eighty percent of everything in mathematics. It's like

0:20:48.760 --> 0:20:51.200
<v Speaker 1>so much of stuff in mathematics that like Oiler just

0:20:51.280 --> 0:20:53.199
<v Speaker 1>let somebody else take credit for because he's already got

0:20:53.240 --> 0:20:56.600
<v Speaker 1>everything else named after him, which is amazing. So there's

0:20:56.600 --> 0:20:59.520
<v Speaker 1>no problem with Bernoulli's equations. But there are always a

0:20:59.600 --> 0:21:03.359
<v Speaker 1>simple description like brenell The's equations describe fluid flow, and

0:21:03.359 --> 0:21:06.159
<v Speaker 1>they make some assumptions like you're talking about a fluid

0:21:06.200 --> 0:21:09.280
<v Speaker 1>as if it's incompressible, for example, or you're talking about

0:21:09.280 --> 0:21:12.600
<v Speaker 1>it as if it's not made of microscopic particles. That's

0:21:12.720 --> 0:21:15.439
<v Speaker 1>not true, right, Air is made of microscopic particles. It

0:21:15.520 --> 0:21:18.520
<v Speaker 1>is compressible. That doesn't mean that the equations don't apply.

0:21:19.000 --> 0:21:21.520
<v Speaker 1>It means that they apply in some limited sense. It

0:21:21.560 --> 0:21:23.919
<v Speaker 1>also might just be the wrong story. It might not

0:21:24.000 --> 0:21:27.399
<v Speaker 1>provide the answer the explanation. You know, what we're looking

0:21:27.440 --> 0:21:30.480
<v Speaker 1>for is an answer to a question which is macroscopic.

0:21:30.600 --> 0:21:32.399
<v Speaker 1>Like we see the wing go through the air, the

0:21:32.400 --> 0:21:35.000
<v Speaker 1>wing goes up. We want to know why. That's sort

0:21:35.000 --> 0:21:38.399
<v Speaker 1>of like a human question, right, it's not a mathematical question.

0:21:38.520 --> 0:21:41.040
<v Speaker 1>It's not like there's a prediction and number we're trying

0:21:41.080 --> 0:21:44.080
<v Speaker 1>to calculate. We want like a story that tells us

0:21:44.119 --> 0:21:46.640
<v Speaker 1>why this is happening. And that's a little bit more

0:21:46.680 --> 0:21:49.920
<v Speaker 1>slippery than just mathematics. It's something to do with cause

0:21:49.960 --> 0:21:52.639
<v Speaker 1>and effect and understanding, and you know, it's at the

0:21:52.640 --> 0:21:55.080
<v Speaker 1>heart of science is coming up with these stories. But

0:21:55.119 --> 0:21:58.200
<v Speaker 1>it's not always easy, especially when we're zooming out from

0:21:58.240 --> 0:22:01.720
<v Speaker 1>a microscopic universe, to try to tell a story macroscopically.

0:22:02.119 --> 0:22:04.600
<v Speaker 1>It's like economics. You know, you can ask like, why

0:22:04.640 --> 0:22:07.520
<v Speaker 1>do prices go down? Well, I have this theory of inflation.

0:22:07.640 --> 0:22:10.679
<v Speaker 1>I have a theory that involves prices and supply chains, whatever,

0:22:10.720 --> 0:22:12.840
<v Speaker 1>and that the theory can be correct, but it doesn't

0:22:12.880 --> 0:22:16.520
<v Speaker 1>always apply because the conditions it assumes aren't always relevant,

0:22:16.640 --> 0:22:19.000
<v Speaker 1>and it doesn't always answer the question that you're asking.

0:22:19.600 --> 0:22:22.160
<v Speaker 3>I feel like, the next time I get on a plane,

0:22:22.320 --> 0:22:25.040
<v Speaker 3>I'm going to think to myself, I wish it were simple.

0:22:25.520 --> 0:22:28.000
<v Speaker 4>I wish we've really understood this, But plays tend to

0:22:28.000 --> 0:22:30.919
<v Speaker 4>stay up. So that's good. So we've established that the

0:22:30.960 --> 0:22:34.640
<v Speaker 4>Germans got everything wrong and World War one? Oh wait,

0:22:34.640 --> 0:22:35.920
<v Speaker 4>was that World War One or World War two?

0:22:36.480 --> 0:22:38.000
<v Speaker 1>This is World War One we're talking about.

0:22:38.240 --> 0:22:39.440
<v Speaker 4>Well, they got it wrong both times.

0:22:39.480 --> 0:22:52.240
<v Speaker 9>Sorry guys.

0:22:57.040 --> 0:23:00.840
<v Speaker 3>Okay, so we know that when a plane over it

0:23:00.880 --> 0:23:02.600
<v Speaker 3>doesn't crash into the ground.

0:23:03.200 --> 0:23:04.920
<v Speaker 4>What was he getting wrong? Bernoulli?

0:23:05.480 --> 0:23:08.040
<v Speaker 1>So, Bernoulli's story is very nice, and it's very simple,

0:23:08.240 --> 0:23:10.600
<v Speaker 1>and there's lots of it that's correct, but as you say,

0:23:10.600 --> 0:23:13.359
<v Speaker 1>it doesn't explain some things. It doesn't explain why planes

0:23:13.400 --> 0:23:16.160
<v Speaker 1>can fly upset down, and it also doesn't explain something

0:23:16.200 --> 0:23:18.960
<v Speaker 1>really crucial at the heart of the story, which is

0:23:19.280 --> 0:23:21.960
<v Speaker 1>why is the air moving faster over the top of

0:23:22.000 --> 0:23:24.560
<v Speaker 1>the wing than the bottom of the wing. Like we said,

0:23:24.800 --> 0:23:26.960
<v Speaker 1>the wing is asymmetric, it's curbing on the top and

0:23:27.000 --> 0:23:29.480
<v Speaker 1>it's flat on the bottom. But why does that make

0:23:29.520 --> 0:23:32.920
<v Speaker 1>the air go faster over the top? And you often

0:23:32.960 --> 0:23:36.960
<v Speaker 1>hear this pop side explanation which is completely wrong, which

0:23:37.000 --> 0:23:39.080
<v Speaker 1>is that it's a longer trip over the top of

0:23:39.080 --> 0:23:41.800
<v Speaker 1>the wing, so the air has to go faster in

0:23:41.920 --> 0:23:45.040
<v Speaker 1>order to meet its air particle partners at the back

0:23:45.119 --> 0:23:45.680
<v Speaker 1>end of the wing.

0:23:45.960 --> 0:23:48.639
<v Speaker 4>Well, why would it have to exactly, why.

0:23:48.520 --> 0:23:51.399
<v Speaker 1>Would it have to It doesn't have to. It's nonsense,

0:23:51.680 --> 0:23:53.399
<v Speaker 1>But you hear this all the time. I was taught

0:23:53.400 --> 0:23:56.320
<v Speaker 1>this myself. You know that, like when air particles hit

0:23:56.320 --> 0:23:58.119
<v Speaker 1>the front of the wing, if one goes above and

0:23:58.119 --> 0:24:00.800
<v Speaker 1>one goes below, then to meet up again at the

0:24:00.840 --> 0:24:03.120
<v Speaker 1>back of the wing, the one that takes the longer

0:24:03.200 --> 0:24:05.960
<v Speaker 1>route would have to go faster. And it's an example

0:24:05.960 --> 0:24:08.560
<v Speaker 1>of like it's a compelling story, but it doesn't actually

0:24:08.600 --> 0:24:10.520
<v Speaker 1>make any sense because they don't have to take the

0:24:10.520 --> 0:24:14.840
<v Speaker 1>same time. It's fine, the universe doesn't like crash or

0:24:14.880 --> 0:24:17.879
<v Speaker 1>implode or hit a seg fault or something. If the

0:24:17.880 --> 0:24:19.280
<v Speaker 1>air particles don't meet up again.

0:24:19.600 --> 0:24:21.679
<v Speaker 3>Yeah right, they're not like buddies. They don't have to

0:24:21.680 --> 0:24:23.320
<v Speaker 3>get to the same spot at the same time. Yeah

0:24:23.359 --> 0:24:25.320
<v Speaker 3>all right, so that doesn't have to happen.

0:24:25.600 --> 0:24:27.879
<v Speaker 1>So that doesn't have to happen. That's not the explanation

0:24:28.200 --> 0:24:30.399
<v Speaker 1>for why air moves faster over the top, and so

0:24:30.480 --> 0:24:33.199
<v Speaker 1>the Bernoulli story is sort of lacking that explanation, like

0:24:33.320 --> 0:24:36.679
<v Speaker 1>why is there this pressure difference? And it opens this

0:24:36.760 --> 0:24:39.200
<v Speaker 1>door to this question of like, well, did the speed

0:24:39.440 --> 0:24:42.199
<v Speaker 1>differences cause the pressure differences or is it the pressure

0:24:42.200 --> 0:24:45.600
<v Speaker 1>differences that are causing the speed differences. Because Bernoulli's equation

0:24:45.680 --> 0:24:49.440
<v Speaker 1>doesn't give us causality, just says lower pressure, higher speed.

0:24:49.720 --> 0:24:51.960
<v Speaker 1>It doesn't say that lower pressure is caused by the

0:24:52.040 --> 0:24:54.720
<v Speaker 1>higher speed. It could also be the higher speed is

0:24:54.760 --> 0:24:57.199
<v Speaker 1>caused by the lower pressure. So that tells us that

0:24:57.240 --> 0:24:59.840
<v Speaker 1>we need more to the story. Bernulli story can't just

0:25:00.040 --> 0:25:02.760
<v Speaker 1>crowed completely. Uhy planes fly because it doesn't tell us

0:25:02.760 --> 0:25:05.760
<v Speaker 1>why planes fly upside down, and it doesn't explain why

0:25:05.840 --> 0:25:08.280
<v Speaker 1>we see air going faster over the top of the wing,

0:25:08.320 --> 0:25:10.320
<v Speaker 1>which is something we definitely see happening.

0:25:10.840 --> 0:25:13.200
<v Speaker 3>Right, So, I know we're about to talk about another explanation.

0:25:13.680 --> 0:25:17.320
<v Speaker 3>But does looking at birds help at all? Because they have,

0:25:17.520 --> 0:25:19.959
<v Speaker 3>you know, different kinds of wing shapes and they've kind

0:25:20.000 --> 0:25:22.600
<v Speaker 3>of figured it out over evolutionary time. This isn't going

0:25:22.680 --> 0:25:25.080
<v Speaker 3>to give us the pressure answer, but does it give

0:25:25.160 --> 0:25:28.439
<v Speaker 3>us some insights into like how these wings should be shaped.

0:25:28.640 --> 0:25:30.359
<v Speaker 3>I'm getting off track, but I just looked at a

0:25:30.359 --> 0:25:31.760
<v Speaker 3>picture of a bird in my office and.

0:25:31.720 --> 0:25:34.240
<v Speaker 1>Now I have to ask it does and bird wings

0:25:34.240 --> 0:25:37.600
<v Speaker 1>work with similar principles to airplane wings, except of course

0:25:37.640 --> 0:25:41.359
<v Speaker 1>for the flapping part. But for gliding they do fascinatingly.

0:25:41.560 --> 0:25:44.919
<v Speaker 1>Insect wings are even more complicated, and insect flight is

0:25:44.960 --> 0:25:48.000
<v Speaker 1>not something we understand like at all. It's really kind

0:25:48.000 --> 0:25:50.280
<v Speaker 1>of incredible. We should do a whole another episode about

0:25:50.280 --> 0:25:51.160
<v Speaker 1>why insects fly.

0:25:51.680 --> 0:25:54.440
<v Speaker 3>And if you're ever feeling depressed, there are some slow

0:25:54.480 --> 0:25:57.680
<v Speaker 3>mode videos of insects trying to take off and it.

0:25:57.720 --> 0:26:00.560
<v Speaker 4>Is the most clumsy, amazing thing I've I've ever seen.

0:26:00.640 --> 0:26:02.639
<v Speaker 3>It blows my mind that they ever get off the ground,

0:26:02.640 --> 0:26:04.520
<v Speaker 3>and it makes my daughter left so hard she peeps

0:26:04.520 --> 0:26:04.840
<v Speaker 3>a little.

0:26:05.119 --> 0:26:07.840
<v Speaker 1>So I knew a guy who did these experiments where

0:26:07.840 --> 0:26:10.119
<v Speaker 1>they put an insect on a pin that like glued

0:26:10.119 --> 0:26:12.360
<v Speaker 1>it to a pin and then they showed it videos,

0:26:12.600 --> 0:26:14.439
<v Speaker 1>so it was like thought it was flying and they

0:26:14.440 --> 0:26:16.600
<v Speaker 1>would like try to take videos of its wings moving

0:26:16.600 --> 0:26:18.359
<v Speaker 1>to understand it. It's kind of incredible.

0:26:18.480 --> 0:26:20.520
<v Speaker 3>All right, this has been an amazing tangent. I've had

0:26:20.560 --> 0:26:22.880
<v Speaker 3>a lot of fun. Let's go back to World War One,

0:26:22.920 --> 0:26:25.640
<v Speaker 3>which is less fun. So I think we've talked about

0:26:25.720 --> 0:26:29.200
<v Speaker 3>the shortfalls in Bernoulli's explanation. Are we ready to move

0:26:29.240 --> 0:26:31.359
<v Speaker 3>on to what the British folks were thinking?

0:26:31.720 --> 0:26:34.399
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, So across the English channel we had folks that

0:26:34.440 --> 0:26:37.080
<v Speaker 1>are working on a completely different theory, and not a

0:26:37.080 --> 0:26:40.199
<v Speaker 1>completely different theory just because they disagreed scientifically with the

0:26:40.240 --> 0:26:43.280
<v Speaker 1>best approach. Remember there's a war here, and so they're

0:26:43.359 --> 0:26:44.879
<v Speaker 1>not going to collaborate. They're not going to be like

0:26:44.880 --> 0:26:47.800
<v Speaker 1>going to the same conferences and sharing their ideas. It's

0:26:47.800 --> 0:26:50.000
<v Speaker 1>sort of like when evolution splits. You know, you get

0:26:50.000 --> 0:26:52.120
<v Speaker 1>all these weird animals off on an island and they

0:26:52.160 --> 0:26:55.600
<v Speaker 1>diverge into their own crazy direction and get weird pouches

0:26:55.600 --> 0:26:57.919
<v Speaker 1>for their babies or whatever. It's what happens when you

0:26:57.960 --> 0:27:01.439
<v Speaker 1>work in isolation. You get competing nations, and so we

0:27:01.520 --> 0:27:03.800
<v Speaker 1>have this fascinating sort of social experiment where you like,

0:27:03.840 --> 0:27:06.080
<v Speaker 1>isolated two groups of scientists and asked them to solve

0:27:06.119 --> 0:27:08.240
<v Speaker 1>the same problem and they took very different approaches.

0:27:08.640 --> 0:27:12.359
<v Speaker 3>So was it like Allopatrick speciation where they weren't encountering

0:27:12.400 --> 0:27:14.600
<v Speaker 3>each other at all anymore and that's why they come

0:27:14.680 --> 0:27:16.600
<v Speaker 3>up with different theories because it was no cross talk.

0:27:16.920 --> 0:27:20.160
<v Speaker 3>Or was it s Patrick expeciation where the ideas could

0:27:20.200 --> 0:27:22.920
<v Speaker 3>have flowed between each other, but they were still deciding

0:27:22.920 --> 0:27:25.439
<v Speaker 3>to stay segregated. Was it nationalism or did they just

0:27:25.440 --> 0:27:25.680
<v Speaker 3>not know?

0:27:25.960 --> 0:27:26.720
<v Speaker 4>Is what I'm wondering.

0:27:26.920 --> 0:27:29.800
<v Speaker 1>I think it started with nationalism, but then it developed

0:27:30.040 --> 0:27:33.399
<v Speaker 1>into sort of tribal camps and the Germans criticized the British,

0:27:33.400 --> 0:27:36.159
<v Speaker 1>and the British criticized the Germans. You know, even after

0:27:36.280 --> 0:27:38.760
<v Speaker 1>the First War, when these guys could have gotten together

0:27:38.800 --> 0:27:41.640
<v Speaker 1>and had like a global, unified theory of flight, they

0:27:41.680 --> 0:27:44.560
<v Speaker 1>continued working in their own direction because they were invested

0:27:44.600 --> 0:27:46.720
<v Speaker 1>in you know, this guy's advisor told him that the

0:27:46.720 --> 0:27:49.719
<v Speaker 1>German approach was nonsense, and the German guy's adviser told

0:27:49.760 --> 0:27:52.359
<v Speaker 1>him the British approach was scheiss, you know or whatever,

0:27:52.760 --> 0:27:53.520
<v Speaker 1>And so.

0:27:53.640 --> 0:27:54.520
<v Speaker 4>Do you speak German?

0:27:56.000 --> 0:27:59.119
<v Speaker 1>I do not speak German. I speak Danish, which is

0:27:59.119 --> 0:28:02.080
<v Speaker 1>sort of Germanic a little bit, but that's a big

0:28:02.119 --> 0:28:05.359
<v Speaker 1>German anyway. So the British across the English Channel didn't

0:28:05.440 --> 0:28:07.560
<v Speaker 1>like the German approach. They didn't like thinking about air

0:28:07.640 --> 0:28:10.680
<v Speaker 1>as a fluid because they were like, this is too idealized.

0:28:10.720 --> 0:28:14.080
<v Speaker 1>They can't explain what's really happening. The Germans thought, you know,

0:28:14.119 --> 0:28:17.240
<v Speaker 1>ideal fluids are a fine approximation, but the British didn't

0:28:17.320 --> 0:28:19.440
<v Speaker 1>like it. And you know, anytime you're making an explanation

0:28:19.480 --> 0:28:22.080
<v Speaker 1>in science, you're going to be making approximations. It's just

0:28:22.119 --> 0:28:25.200
<v Speaker 1>a question of what approximations you make. They're always shortcuts.

0:28:25.400 --> 0:28:29.200
<v Speaker 1>Nobody can completely describe the full complexity of the universe

0:28:29.600 --> 0:28:32.119
<v Speaker 1>in their equations. It's always a simplification. And there's an

0:28:32.200 --> 0:28:36.280
<v Speaker 1>art to that, choosing the simplification that captures the essential

0:28:36.359 --> 0:28:39.320
<v Speaker 1>details of what's happening in reality, so you can provide

0:28:39.320 --> 0:28:43.800
<v Speaker 1>a useful explanation while dismissing all the irrelevant complexities that

0:28:44.040 --> 0:28:47.040
<v Speaker 1>you don't need to worry about, which is why, for example,

0:28:47.080 --> 0:28:49.520
<v Speaker 1>we can talk about how a ball flies through the

0:28:49.560 --> 0:28:52.720
<v Speaker 1>air and often ignore air resistance and ignore the quantum

0:28:52.720 --> 0:28:55.160
<v Speaker 1>effects and ignore everything else that's happening, the tug of

0:28:55.280 --> 0:28:59.560
<v Speaker 1>Jupiter on that ball, because we judiciously choose what approximations

0:28:59.600 --> 0:29:03.040
<v Speaker 1>to make. So that's what's happening here is two subjective approaches,

0:29:03.520 --> 0:29:06.520
<v Speaker 1>and the British were focused not on this ideal fluid approach,

0:29:06.560 --> 0:29:09.640
<v Speaker 1>but instead of using just a simple approach with Newton's law,

0:29:09.680 --> 0:29:11.440
<v Speaker 1>they were just thinking about the forces.

0:29:11.800 --> 0:29:13.800
<v Speaker 3>How do forces act differently on the top and the

0:29:13.800 --> 0:29:15.480
<v Speaker 3>bottom based on that tear drop shape.

0:29:15.880 --> 0:29:18.880
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, so the Newton's approach basically ignores the tear drop

0:29:18.920 --> 0:29:21.040
<v Speaker 1>shape and it says the shape of the wing isn't

0:29:21.040 --> 0:29:24.400
<v Speaker 1>actually important. What's crucial is the angle of the wing

0:29:24.680 --> 0:29:27.600
<v Speaker 1>into the wind. So they're thinking, hey, the wing is

0:29:27.640 --> 0:29:30.080
<v Speaker 1>tilted a little bit, and so as the wing is

0:29:30.120 --> 0:29:33.760
<v Speaker 1>moving through the air, the wind gets bounced basically off

0:29:33.800 --> 0:29:36.640
<v Speaker 1>the wind and goes down. So you have wind flowing

0:29:36.680 --> 0:29:39.080
<v Speaker 1>onto the wing and you have an angle, and then

0:29:39.120 --> 0:29:41.520
<v Speaker 1>it bounces down and so the wing goes up. And

0:29:41.640 --> 0:29:43.880
<v Speaker 1>like anybody who's ridden in a car and put their

0:29:43.920 --> 0:29:46.720
<v Speaker 1>hand out at an angle knows that you can feel

0:29:46.800 --> 0:29:49.320
<v Speaker 1>lift right, your hand basically flies and your hand's not

0:29:49.360 --> 0:29:51.160
<v Speaker 1>a tear drop, it's not an air foil. It's not

0:29:51.200 --> 0:29:55.200
<v Speaker 1>like carefully germanically engineered to get lift. It's just your hand,

0:29:55.480 --> 0:29:57.880
<v Speaker 1>you know, But still you can get lift. This is

0:29:57.920 --> 0:30:02.240
<v Speaker 1>a simple application of Newton's theory. Like action reaction, the

0:30:02.280 --> 0:30:05.120
<v Speaker 1>wind gets pushed down by the angle of the wing.

0:30:05.360 --> 0:30:08.240
<v Speaker 1>The aeronautical engineers call it the angle of attack, and

0:30:08.280 --> 0:30:10.120
<v Speaker 1>so the wing gets pushed up. Very simple.

0:30:10.520 --> 0:30:14.440
<v Speaker 3>So if that's true, then you could adjust wing shape

0:30:14.760 --> 0:30:17.600
<v Speaker 3>to be even better at flying by making it bend

0:30:17.720 --> 0:30:20.280
<v Speaker 3>even more so that you're stopping even more air as

0:30:20.320 --> 0:30:23.520
<v Speaker 3>you go. Did the British try that to prove how

0:30:23.600 --> 0:30:24.360
<v Speaker 3>much better they were?

0:30:24.680 --> 0:30:28.200
<v Speaker 1>I wish you'd been around in the aeronautical society, so

0:30:28.360 --> 0:30:31.320
<v Speaker 1>clear with your questions. So what you're describe me is

0:30:31.320 --> 0:30:33.880
<v Speaker 1>actually what you see in an airplane when you take off,

0:30:34.160 --> 0:30:36.800
<v Speaker 1>if you're paying attention to the wing. Modern airplanes actually

0:30:36.800 --> 0:30:39.400
<v Speaker 1>have a changeable shape, right. They have these flaps and

0:30:39.440 --> 0:30:41.880
<v Speaker 1>these levers, right, so they can change the shape of

0:30:41.920 --> 0:30:44.760
<v Speaker 1>the wing, and during takeoff they do just that. They

0:30:44.760 --> 0:30:47.320
<v Speaker 1>push down the back of the wing so it's more

0:30:47.320 --> 0:30:49.640
<v Speaker 1>of a curvy shape. It like grabs the air a

0:30:49.720 --> 0:30:52.600
<v Speaker 1>little bit more, so you get more lift during takeoff.

0:30:52.840 --> 0:30:55.160
<v Speaker 1>And then when you're flying, they make it flatter, so

0:30:55.360 --> 0:30:57.720
<v Speaker 1>you're cruising, you get less lyft, but you also get

0:30:57.760 --> 0:31:01.400
<v Speaker 1>less drag. Drag is the force that pushes the wing backwards,

0:31:01.400 --> 0:31:04.600
<v Speaker 1>so you want upwards force lift without as much backwards

0:31:04.640 --> 0:31:08.080
<v Speaker 1>force drag. So what you're seeing is exactly what modern

0:31:08.120 --> 0:31:11.200
<v Speaker 1>airplanes do. Is they make a curveer wing you take

0:31:11.200 --> 0:31:12.280
<v Speaker 1>off to get more lift.

0:31:12.760 --> 0:31:13.280
<v Speaker 4>Very cool.

0:31:13.480 --> 0:31:15.479
<v Speaker 3>I was reading about programmable matter, and I think one

0:31:15.480 --> 0:31:18.800
<v Speaker 3>of the proposals was to have matter that responds to

0:31:19.040 --> 0:31:22.240
<v Speaker 3>the environment and makes those changes on its own without

0:31:22.240 --> 0:31:23.320
<v Speaker 3>you needing to do anything.

0:31:23.360 --> 0:31:25.440
<v Speaker 4>But I am glad we have more control over the

0:31:25.440 --> 0:31:28.080
<v Speaker 4>process right now. I'm not ready to have us let

0:31:28.120 --> 0:31:29.240
<v Speaker 4>go of that control yet.

0:31:29.520 --> 0:31:32.080
<v Speaker 1>And the nice thing about this explanation is it explains

0:31:32.280 --> 0:31:35.160
<v Speaker 1>why planes can fly upside down. They fly upside down

0:31:35.240 --> 0:31:37.480
<v Speaker 1>because they have the right angle of attack. It doesn't

0:31:37.480 --> 0:31:40.360
<v Speaker 1>matter the shape of a wing at all. It just

0:31:40.480 --> 0:31:43.360
<v Speaker 1>matters that the airplane wing is at the correct angle.

0:31:43.760 --> 0:31:45.520
<v Speaker 1>So if you fly your airplane upside down, you can

0:31:45.520 --> 0:31:48.120
<v Speaker 1>do it as long as the wing is angled into

0:31:48.160 --> 0:31:49.520
<v Speaker 1>the air at the right angle.

0:31:50.120 --> 0:31:54.640
<v Speaker 3>So does this completely explain everything? That's never how our

0:31:54.720 --> 0:31:58.160
<v Speaker 3>podcast episodes end. So what is it missing.

0:31:58.720 --> 0:32:01.480
<v Speaker 1>So this is a beautiful story of the limitations of

0:32:01.520 --> 0:32:05.640
<v Speaker 1>science because both explanations explain something, but neither of them

0:32:05.720 --> 0:32:08.840
<v Speaker 1>tell the complete story. So, for example, there's a couple

0:32:08.880 --> 0:32:13.200
<v Speaker 1>of things that the British Newton's theory force explanation doesn't describe.

0:32:13.440 --> 0:32:15.360
<v Speaker 1>Number one is what's going on on the top of

0:32:15.360 --> 0:32:17.760
<v Speaker 1>the wing, right, This just focuses on the bottom of

0:32:17.800 --> 0:32:20.560
<v Speaker 1>the wing, but we see that the pressure is lower

0:32:20.560 --> 0:32:23.120
<v Speaker 1>on the top of the wing. The Newton's theory approach says,

0:32:23.200 --> 0:32:25.400
<v Speaker 1>all the lift comes from below, that you're getting this

0:32:25.520 --> 0:32:27.960
<v Speaker 1>force from the wind that's hitting it from below. But

0:32:28.000 --> 0:32:30.160
<v Speaker 1>we see this lower pressure above, and it turns out,

0:32:30.200 --> 0:32:32.920
<v Speaker 1>as we'll talk about later, that it contributes maybe even

0:32:33.040 --> 0:32:35.640
<v Speaker 1>more to the lift, the low pressure above the wing

0:32:35.920 --> 0:32:38.400
<v Speaker 1>than the high pressure does below the wing. And the

0:32:38.440 --> 0:32:42.240
<v Speaker 1>Newton's theory cannot explain this. That's number one, and.

0:32:42.160 --> 0:32:44.720
<v Speaker 3>It can't explain why there's low pressure above the wing, right,

0:32:44.800 --> 0:32:45.760
<v Speaker 3>just like the other one.

0:32:45.720 --> 0:32:48.000
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, exactly. Number two is that if you do these

0:32:48.000 --> 0:32:51.400
<v Speaker 1>smoke studies, we see that the wing affects the flow

0:32:51.440 --> 0:32:54.160
<v Speaker 1>of the air, not just below the wing. It's like

0:32:54.240 --> 0:32:57.280
<v Speaker 1>the influence of the wing on the air is larger

0:32:57.360 --> 0:33:00.200
<v Speaker 1>than just the wing, Like the air begins to flow

0:33:00.320 --> 0:33:03.040
<v Speaker 1>up above the wing before it hits the wing. There

0:33:03.080 --> 0:33:06.040
<v Speaker 1>is this upwash in advance of the wing and this

0:33:06.200 --> 0:33:09.520
<v Speaker 1>downwash after the wing. So it's not just like you

0:33:09.600 --> 0:33:11.680
<v Speaker 1>have a paddle and it's being hit by molecules and

0:33:11.720 --> 0:33:15.040
<v Speaker 1>it's getting pushed up. There's a complicated interplay here between

0:33:15.040 --> 0:33:17.240
<v Speaker 1>the wing and the flow around it and the air

0:33:17.320 --> 0:33:21.720
<v Speaker 1>itself applying pressure on itself. So you can't ignore the

0:33:21.760 --> 0:33:23.960
<v Speaker 1>sort of fluid effects of the air if you want

0:33:24.000 --> 0:33:25.720
<v Speaker 1>to completely describe what's happening.

0:33:25.960 --> 0:33:27.840
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, so while you were describing all of that, I thought,

0:33:27.880 --> 0:33:30.360
<v Speaker 3>oh man, it really feels like fluid dynamics should explained.

0:33:30.640 --> 0:33:34.200
<v Speaker 3>So maybe the German example should have worked. Why does

0:33:34.240 --> 0:33:37.080
<v Speaker 3>the fluid example not work then? With all of that

0:33:37.160 --> 0:33:38.760
<v Speaker 3>complicated stuff happening.

0:33:38.480 --> 0:33:40.600
<v Speaker 1>So the fluid example does explain some parts of it.

0:33:40.640 --> 0:33:42.400
<v Speaker 1>And so where we're going to go in the end

0:33:42.520 --> 0:33:45.360
<v Speaker 1>is this like weird hybrid of the British German theory

0:33:45.560 --> 0:33:48.320
<v Speaker 1>in order to have the most complete explanation of why

0:33:48.360 --> 0:33:50.560
<v Speaker 1>it happens. But what we're doing right now is sort

0:33:50.560 --> 0:33:53.560
<v Speaker 1>of examining like the failure of the individual ones. So

0:33:53.600 --> 0:33:57.920
<v Speaker 1>the German explanation. The fluid approach can describe the flow

0:33:58.080 --> 0:34:00.680
<v Speaker 1>of the fluid around the wing, but the British approach,

0:34:00.720 --> 0:34:03.520
<v Speaker 1>though it's simple and satisfying, can't describe all of this stuff.

0:34:03.680 --> 0:34:04.760
<v Speaker 4>Okay, spoiler alert.

0:34:04.960 --> 0:34:07.200
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, so one thing that fails to describe is the

0:34:07.240 --> 0:34:10.279
<v Speaker 1>sort of holistic flow of the air around the wing.

0:34:10.719 --> 0:34:14.200
<v Speaker 1>The other is stalling and the Newton's force approach. The

0:34:14.200 --> 0:34:16.920
<v Speaker 1>only reason you're flying is the angle of attack, and

0:34:16.960 --> 0:34:19.600
<v Speaker 1>the greater the angle, the greater the force. Right, But

0:34:19.640 --> 0:34:22.480
<v Speaker 1>anybody who flies knows that if you have too great

0:34:22.520 --> 0:34:25.360
<v Speaker 1>an angle, you're going to stall, Like if your plane

0:34:25.400 --> 0:34:28.040
<v Speaker 1>is pointed too far upwards, you're not going to get

0:34:28.080 --> 0:34:31.200
<v Speaker 1>lift anymore. And what happens technically, what we see in

0:34:31.320 --> 0:34:34.319
<v Speaker 1>wind tunnels is that if the angle of attack is

0:34:34.360 --> 0:34:36.920
<v Speaker 1>too great, then as the air flows over the top

0:34:37.000 --> 0:34:40.520
<v Speaker 1>of the wing, it doesn't merge smoothly with the air

0:34:40.719 --> 0:34:44.000
<v Speaker 1>flowing below the wing, and you get this like weird turbulence.

0:34:44.000 --> 0:34:46.960
<v Speaker 1>They call it a separation region because the air doesn't

0:34:47.040 --> 0:34:50.160
<v Speaker 1>nicely reconnect. And you know, when you're going through a fluid,

0:34:50.239 --> 0:34:53.719
<v Speaker 1>turbulence is a problem. You want to minimize turbulence. And

0:34:53.800 --> 0:34:56.160
<v Speaker 1>so if the angle is too large. This is like

0:34:56.320 --> 0:34:58.480
<v Speaker 1>gap between the air flows as they come off the

0:34:58.480 --> 0:35:01.000
<v Speaker 1>back of the wing and they don't don't merge nicely.

0:35:01.360 --> 0:35:04.160
<v Speaker 1>That's called the separation region between these flows, and that

0:35:04.200 --> 0:35:06.920
<v Speaker 1>creates the stall. You lose your lift. So you can't

0:35:06.960 --> 0:35:10.400
<v Speaker 1>explain that. Also with the Newton's explanation, you need some

0:35:10.640 --> 0:35:12.520
<v Speaker 1>fluid theory to explain.

0:35:12.120 --> 0:35:17.040
<v Speaker 3>That slightly tangential. We haven't discussed propellers. Do propellers and

0:35:17.160 --> 0:35:19.719
<v Speaker 3>jet engines play any role here or is that just

0:35:19.840 --> 0:35:22.400
<v Speaker 3>in like that moves us forward and all of the

0:35:22.520 --> 0:35:24.200
<v Speaker 3>uppiness comes from the wings.

0:35:25.800 --> 0:35:29.880
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, So basically engines just provide forward velocity so that

0:35:30.000 --> 0:35:32.680
<v Speaker 1>the wings attack the air. All The propellers are a

0:35:32.680 --> 0:35:35.440
<v Speaker 1>subtle point because propellers have a particular shape, which is

0:35:35.520 --> 0:35:38.440
<v Speaker 1>related to the shape of a wing, right, because it's

0:35:38.480 --> 0:35:41.200
<v Speaker 1>converting motion in one direction to air velocity in the

0:35:41.239 --> 0:35:44.240
<v Speaker 1>other direction. So the shape of a propeller is related

0:35:44.280 --> 0:35:46.320
<v Speaker 1>to the shape of a wing. But for the question

0:35:46.400 --> 0:35:48.319
<v Speaker 1>of why planes fly, you can think of its just

0:35:48.400 --> 0:35:51.120
<v Speaker 1>like something pushy, right, the pushy bit that gets the

0:35:51.160 --> 0:35:53.120
<v Speaker 1>plane moving through the air. Yeah.

0:35:53.239 --> 0:35:55.000
<v Speaker 3>Okay, so you've got the pushy bit, but we don't

0:35:55.040 --> 0:35:57.680
<v Speaker 3>understand what's happening around the wings yet, So how do

0:35:57.760 --> 0:36:01.280
<v Speaker 3>you move from figuring out that the German and the British

0:36:01.320 --> 0:36:06.279
<v Speaker 3>explanation are failing in some way to figuring out the

0:36:06.400 --> 0:36:08.440
<v Speaker 3>answer to what's going on? Is this like where we

0:36:08.480 --> 0:36:10.360
<v Speaker 3>are we just don't know or are there more experiments

0:36:10.400 --> 0:36:11.520
<v Speaker 3>you can do to figure it out?

0:36:11.600 --> 0:36:14.080
<v Speaker 1>So what you shouldn't do is ask the world's smartest

0:36:14.080 --> 0:36:18.240
<v Speaker 1>physicist Einstein to weigh in on this very practical engineering question.

0:36:18.600 --> 0:36:20.560
<v Speaker 3>Well, let's find out what he had to say after

0:36:20.600 --> 0:36:40.240
<v Speaker 3>the break, all right, So for most of the Daniel

0:36:40.280 --> 0:36:42.759
<v Speaker 3>led episodes, we have to walk through a what did

0:36:42.800 --> 0:36:46.680
<v Speaker 3>Einstein think? Because he just provided so many good insights

0:36:46.719 --> 0:36:49.400
<v Speaker 3>into so many things. So let's figure out what did

0:36:49.440 --> 0:36:50.480
<v Speaker 3>Einstein think about this?

0:36:51.040 --> 0:36:54.880
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, so Einstein, he's a smart guy. He developed relativity,

0:36:55.239 --> 0:36:58.600
<v Speaker 1>he struggled and failed to integrate quantum mechanics into it.

0:36:58.640 --> 0:37:01.080
<v Speaker 1>So it's not like he solved every problem he attacked.

0:37:01.080 --> 0:37:03.120
<v Speaker 1>But he was a smart guy. And you know, he

0:37:03.160 --> 0:37:05.920
<v Speaker 1>was German and this is a relevant question for the

0:37:05.960 --> 0:37:08.319
<v Speaker 1>Germans at the time, and he was interested in this

0:37:08.560 --> 0:37:11.480
<v Speaker 1>and he wrote, quote, there's a lot of obscurity surrounding

0:37:11.480 --> 0:37:14.360
<v Speaker 1>these questions and open puzzles like this, you know, they

0:37:14.400 --> 0:37:16.839
<v Speaker 1>attract smart people like, oh, maybe I can figure this out.

0:37:16.840 --> 0:37:20.480
<v Speaker 1>Maybe there's an insight, a moment of clarity that will

0:37:20.520 --> 0:37:24.040
<v Speaker 1>just untangle this whole mess. And so he thought about

0:37:24.080 --> 0:37:26.680
<v Speaker 1>flight from the German point of view, and he actually

0:37:26.680 --> 0:37:30.360
<v Speaker 1>designed his own wing shape, sort of a weird variation

0:37:30.600 --> 0:37:32.799
<v Speaker 1>on the air foril Is Einstein. Remember, he was not

0:37:32.920 --> 0:37:35.720
<v Speaker 1>just a clever physicist. He worked in the patent office

0:37:36.000 --> 0:37:38.000
<v Speaker 1>and so he had seen lots of inventions. He had

0:37:38.000 --> 0:37:40.919
<v Speaker 1>a practical mind also, So he designed his own wing

0:37:41.040 --> 0:37:43.640
<v Speaker 1>and he took it to a German aircraft company, and

0:37:43.680 --> 0:37:46.120
<v Speaker 1>you know, he was an esteemed famous scientist at this point,

0:37:46.160 --> 0:37:48.640
<v Speaker 1>so they thought, okay, sure, so they worked with him,

0:37:48.640 --> 0:37:51.520
<v Speaker 1>they collaborated with him, They built the plane, and they

0:37:51.560 --> 0:37:53.960
<v Speaker 1>sent it on a test flight, and the pilot came

0:37:54.000 --> 0:37:55.840
<v Speaker 1>back and said he would never fly the thing again

0:37:55.880 --> 0:37:58.359
<v Speaker 1>because a quote flew like a pregnant duck.

0:38:00.640 --> 0:38:03.640
<v Speaker 3>I feel like whenever a question sort of tiptoes into

0:38:03.640 --> 0:38:06.719
<v Speaker 3>biology and Einstein is involved, you want to back away. So,

0:38:06.760 --> 0:38:09.200
<v Speaker 3>you know, I think maybe most of us know that

0:38:09.280 --> 0:38:10.480
<v Speaker 3>ducks can't get pregnant.

0:38:10.960 --> 0:38:12.839
<v Speaker 4>They carry eggs, but they don't get pregnant the way

0:38:12.840 --> 0:38:13.040
<v Speaker 4>we do.

0:38:13.120 --> 0:38:15.279
<v Speaker 3>And also, like, you know, he married his cousin, which

0:38:15.320 --> 0:38:17.800
<v Speaker 3>I think is a bad idea also from a biological perspective.

0:38:17.800 --> 0:38:18.640
<v Speaker 4>But anyway, okay, So.

0:38:19.040 --> 0:38:22.720
<v Speaker 3>Einstein was great at everything, but not at designing wings.

0:38:22.960 --> 0:38:26.560
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, exactly. And so fast forward fifty years or so,

0:38:26.760 --> 0:38:29.479
<v Speaker 1>what are people talking about today in terms of why

0:38:29.560 --> 0:38:32.840
<v Speaker 1>planes fly? I went across campus here to a colleague

0:38:32.840 --> 0:38:36.480
<v Speaker 1>at UC Irvine, Haythian Taha. He's a professor of aeronautical

0:38:36.520 --> 0:38:40.120
<v Speaker 1>engineering here and he studies lyft. He works on this problem.

0:38:40.440 --> 0:38:43.040
<v Speaker 1>I asked him what is a simple explanation for lyfts?

0:38:43.040 --> 0:38:45.560
<v Speaker 1>And he said, quote, this is not settled in the

0:38:45.600 --> 0:38:50.360
<v Speaker 1>aeronautical engineering community. Please don't laugh. That's a direct quote.

0:38:51.120 --> 0:38:53.480
<v Speaker 1>So here we are laughing. It's hilarious, you know, like

0:38:53.880 --> 0:38:55.840
<v Speaker 1>these guys still haven't figured this out more than one

0:38:55.880 --> 0:38:57.560
<v Speaker 1>hundred years after their right brothers.

0:38:57.800 --> 0:38:59.799
<v Speaker 4>But yet still so much money is made us.

0:39:00.160 --> 0:39:01.400
<v Speaker 3>So it's nice to know you don't have to have

0:39:01.440 --> 0:39:03.480
<v Speaker 3>everything worked out before you commercialize something.

0:39:03.680 --> 0:39:06.280
<v Speaker 1>But let's not oversell it. It's not that we don't

0:39:06.400 --> 0:39:10.680
<v Speaker 1>understand why planes fly. It's that we don't have a compelling,

0:39:11.239 --> 0:39:14.920
<v Speaker 1>simple explanation at the sort of zoomed out level. And

0:39:14.960 --> 0:39:18.040
<v Speaker 1>again there's always a difference between life the microphysics. Can

0:39:18.080 --> 0:39:21.480
<v Speaker 1>you model what's happening with individual air molecules and the

0:39:21.520 --> 0:39:23.600
<v Speaker 1>shape of the wing and come up with a simulation

0:39:23.800 --> 0:39:26.719
<v Speaker 1>in which planes fly. Absolutely, we can, and we do.

0:39:27.040 --> 0:39:29.920
<v Speaker 1>This is why, for example, Boeing can design their airplanes

0:39:30.160 --> 0:39:33.120
<v Speaker 1>on the computer and be confident that they will fly.

0:39:33.200 --> 0:39:35.919
<v Speaker 1>They don't need to use wing tests anymore and build

0:39:35.920 --> 0:39:38.640
<v Speaker 1>a bunch of models to experiment because we have accurate

0:39:38.680 --> 0:39:42.000
<v Speaker 1>simulations for what's going on in the microphysics level. It's

0:39:42.040 --> 0:39:43.680
<v Speaker 1>just that when you zoom out and now you want

0:39:43.680 --> 0:39:46.600
<v Speaker 1>to tell a simple story about what's happening, there are

0:39:46.640 --> 0:39:48.880
<v Speaker 1>competing ways to do that, and all of them ignore

0:39:49.000 --> 0:39:52.160
<v Speaker 1>some details, and so none of them are completely satisfactory.

0:39:52.560 --> 0:39:55.360
<v Speaker 1>So when he says this is not settled, he doesn't

0:39:55.400 --> 0:39:58.160
<v Speaker 1>mean we don't know why planes fly in a sort

0:39:58.160 --> 0:40:02.200
<v Speaker 1>of microphysics point of view, means we don't have a nice, compelling,

0:40:02.440 --> 0:40:06.040
<v Speaker 1>one sentence explanation for why this happens the way we can.

0:40:06.080 --> 0:40:08.440
<v Speaker 1>For example, like a ball flying through the air, why

0:40:08.440 --> 0:40:10.640
<v Speaker 1>does a baseball fly in a parabola? We know the

0:40:10.640 --> 0:40:14.360
<v Speaker 1>answer is when you have constant acceleration, you get parabolic motion. Simple,

0:40:14.400 --> 0:40:17.719
<v Speaker 1>one sentence answer. That's what we're lacking for flight. We

0:40:17.760 --> 0:40:20.880
<v Speaker 1>have a very complex thing that's happening with microphysics, and

0:40:20.920 --> 0:40:23.480
<v Speaker 1>it's when we're struggling to come up with a simplified

0:40:23.520 --> 0:40:25.800
<v Speaker 1>explanation at the macroscopic level.

0:40:26.239 --> 0:40:27.600
<v Speaker 4>Do engineers care?

0:40:28.080 --> 0:40:31.160
<v Speaker 3>So if you can make a simulation on a computer

0:40:31.200 --> 0:40:33.400
<v Speaker 3>that tells you everything you need to know, Like, are

0:40:33.560 --> 0:40:36.919
<v Speaker 3>engineers still interested in this question or has this completely

0:40:37.000 --> 0:40:40.600
<v Speaker 3>moved to the realm of like physicists who never see

0:40:40.640 --> 0:40:42.879
<v Speaker 3>the light who are studying it in their offices, Like, yeah,

0:40:42.880 --> 0:40:44.160
<v Speaker 3>do they care what the answer is anymore?

0:40:44.239 --> 0:40:45.080
<v Speaker 4>Or do physicists care?

0:40:45.120 --> 0:40:50.120
<v Speaker 1>Only absolutely they care because engineers want simple, working models,

0:40:50.520 --> 0:40:52.760
<v Speaker 1>you know, when they want to model how a plane

0:40:52.800 --> 0:40:54.120
<v Speaker 1>is going to fly, they don't want to have to

0:40:54.160 --> 0:40:57.400
<v Speaker 1>go back to describing every single particle. They want simple

0:40:57.400 --> 0:40:59.680
<v Speaker 1>sets of equations that let them work quickly and easily

0:41:00.160 --> 0:41:01.960
<v Speaker 1>the same way. For example, we'd love to be able

0:41:02.040 --> 0:41:05.600
<v Speaker 1>to predict a hurricane without modeling every single rain drop.

0:41:05.840 --> 0:41:08.759
<v Speaker 1>Currently we have the technology, and we're building these incredibly

0:41:08.800 --> 0:41:13.000
<v Speaker 1>powerful computers just to model wind and pressure and predict

0:41:13.040 --> 0:41:15.759
<v Speaker 1>the weather. We'd love simple equations to be able to

0:41:15.800 --> 0:41:19.719
<v Speaker 1>do that right rather than having to use incredibly detailed computation.

0:41:20.239 --> 0:41:24.160
<v Speaker 1>And so anytime we can summarize complexity with simple math,

0:41:24.360 --> 0:41:26.600
<v Speaker 1>we definitely win. So people are definitely working on this

0:41:26.719 --> 0:41:29.800
<v Speaker 1>and trying to find a complete holistic approach that captures

0:41:29.840 --> 0:41:33.000
<v Speaker 1>all this behavior, that lets us do important engineering without

0:41:33.000 --> 0:41:37.719
<v Speaker 1>simulating all the tiny microphysical details. Absolutely, yeah, people care.

0:41:38.120 --> 0:41:40.400
<v Speaker 3>And I want to go on record that I apologize

0:41:40.400 --> 0:41:43.680
<v Speaker 3>for implying that physicists don't go outside.

0:41:44.360 --> 0:41:46.120
<v Speaker 1>What is this outside thing you're talking about? I was

0:41:46.120 --> 0:41:47.960
<v Speaker 1>going to ask you about that. I have heard about this,

0:41:48.120 --> 0:41:49.520
<v Speaker 1>but I've been too shy to ask.

0:41:49.600 --> 0:41:50.920
<v Speaker 4>Can you told me you've been hiking.

0:41:50.960 --> 0:41:53.239
<v Speaker 3>I know that you're maybe even more extreme than I

0:41:53.280 --> 0:41:55.360
<v Speaker 3>am in terms of outdoor adventures.

0:41:56.120 --> 0:41:57.799
<v Speaker 1>No, I do love going outside. That's why I live

0:41:57.840 --> 0:41:59.520
<v Speaker 1>in California. It's so amazing here.

0:42:00.000 --> 0:42:04.279
<v Speaker 3>Oh, the fall right now is absolutely incredible. Okay, So

0:42:04.320 --> 0:42:06.279
<v Speaker 3>we've talked about a lot of different ideas, a lot

0:42:06.320 --> 0:42:08.400
<v Speaker 3>of things we know and we don't know. I know

0:42:08.480 --> 0:42:10.680
<v Speaker 3>the answer at the end is that it's complicated. But

0:42:10.880 --> 0:42:14.440
<v Speaker 3>is there a simple ish kind of way to summarize

0:42:14.480 --> 0:42:16.279
<v Speaker 3>where we are right now in our understanding.

0:42:16.680 --> 0:42:19.560
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, So I think the simplest way to describe it

0:42:19.600 --> 0:42:22.680
<v Speaker 1>is that both of Bernoulli and Newton's stories help, but

0:42:22.760 --> 0:42:25.399
<v Speaker 1>they're both limited, and the limitation is that they're trying

0:42:25.440 --> 0:42:27.680
<v Speaker 1>to tell a story in terms of like simple causes

0:42:27.719 --> 0:42:30.799
<v Speaker 1>and simple effects. The airflows and its bounces off the wing,

0:42:31.040 --> 0:42:33.640
<v Speaker 1>or the pressure is lower above the wing because the

0:42:33.680 --> 0:42:36.080
<v Speaker 1>velocity is higher, and the real story is that the

0:42:36.120 --> 0:42:38.480
<v Speaker 1>cause and effect are not so simple. There's lots of

0:42:38.480 --> 0:42:41.399
<v Speaker 1>things happening here and they are interplaying together, so it's

0:42:41.440 --> 0:42:44.440
<v Speaker 1>not so easy to disentangle the cause and the effect.

0:42:44.680 --> 0:42:47.120
<v Speaker 1>There's a lot of things at work here, pressure and

0:42:47.200 --> 0:42:51.440
<v Speaker 1>velocity and forces all in this fantastic harmony that's making

0:42:51.440 --> 0:42:53.440
<v Speaker 1>the wing go up, which is why none of these

0:42:53.480 --> 0:42:57.080
<v Speaker 1>simple stories are satisfactory. We can weave a slightly more

0:42:57.120 --> 0:43:00.960
<v Speaker 1>complex story to explain why planes fly that involves all

0:43:01.000 --> 0:43:03.920
<v Speaker 1>of these aspects sort of working together. But you know,

0:43:04.000 --> 0:43:07.400
<v Speaker 1>humans like simple stories. Ball goes down because of gravity,

0:43:07.640 --> 0:43:09.840
<v Speaker 1>this kind of thing. We don't have that simple a

0:43:09.920 --> 0:43:10.840
<v Speaker 1>cause and effect.

0:43:10.960 --> 0:43:14.680
<v Speaker 3>I'm always amazed by things that work so well, where

0:43:14.680 --> 0:43:18.000
<v Speaker 3>when you scratch the surface, we really don't understand, like

0:43:18.080 --> 0:43:21.040
<v Speaker 3>I was talking to someone who uses deep brain stimulation

0:43:21.239 --> 0:43:23.760
<v Speaker 3>to treat epilepsy. So, like, when somebody has a seizure,

0:43:23.760 --> 0:43:26.000
<v Speaker 3>they're having like an electrical storm in their brain, and

0:43:26.080 --> 0:43:28.640
<v Speaker 3>sometimes they have electrodes implanted into the center of their

0:43:28.640 --> 0:43:31.600
<v Speaker 3>brain and they essentially just get their brains apped and

0:43:31.680 --> 0:43:32.200
<v Speaker 3>that helps.

0:43:32.480 --> 0:43:34.200
<v Speaker 4>And so I reached out to an expert and I was.

0:43:34.160 --> 0:43:37.799
<v Speaker 3>Like, why does zapping someone's brain with electricity stop the

0:43:38.120 --> 0:43:39.040
<v Speaker 3>epileptic seizure?

0:43:39.080 --> 0:43:40.480
<v Speaker 4>And they're like, we don't know.

0:43:41.840 --> 0:43:43.960
<v Speaker 3>Just like I'm a little nervous getting onto a plane

0:43:44.000 --> 0:43:45.279
<v Speaker 3>hearing why does the plane go up?

0:43:45.360 --> 0:43:47.520
<v Speaker 4>We don't know. I also would not want to hear

0:43:47.640 --> 0:43:48.920
<v Speaker 4>why are you shocking my brain?

0:43:49.280 --> 0:43:49.759
<v Speaker 3>We don't know.

0:43:49.960 --> 0:43:52.640
<v Speaker 4>But in both cases it works, and it seems to

0:43:52.640 --> 0:43:54.960
<v Speaker 4>work reliably, so we get.

0:43:54.800 --> 0:43:57.719
<v Speaker 1>By Also true, I think for bost pharmaceuticals, right, we're like, well,

0:43:57.760 --> 0:44:00.520
<v Speaker 1>it does have this effect, we don't really understand that's

0:44:00.520 --> 0:44:03.160
<v Speaker 1>a biochemistry of it, but hey, keep taking it, you know.

0:44:03.320 --> 0:44:03.719
<v Speaker 9>That's right.

0:44:03.800 --> 0:44:05.200
<v Speaker 4>Yes, we all muddle along.

0:44:05.360 --> 0:44:07.360
<v Speaker 1>And I'm not an anti vaxxer at all. I just

0:44:07.400 --> 0:44:08.920
<v Speaker 1>mean this is sort of the way science is. You

0:44:08.920 --> 0:44:12.120
<v Speaker 1>always understand science at some level, you don't always need

0:44:12.160 --> 0:44:15.399
<v Speaker 1>to understand the microphysical explanation in order to make it work.

0:44:15.480 --> 0:44:18.040
<v Speaker 1>And that's actually a huge gift. Otherwise we couldn't do

0:44:18.040 --> 0:44:20.400
<v Speaker 1>anything if we needed to understand like the nature of

0:44:20.440 --> 0:44:22.640
<v Speaker 1>quantum gravity before we made a bowl of chicken soup,

0:44:22.680 --> 0:44:25.520
<v Speaker 1>we'd never have chicken soup. We'd never understand the world.

0:44:25.560 --> 0:44:29.000
<v Speaker 1>It's lucky that the world can be understood without knowing

0:44:29.080 --> 0:44:31.160
<v Speaker 1>all the details, or science would be impossible.

0:44:31.239 --> 0:44:33.839
<v Speaker 4>It's lucky you can tinker with the world without understanding it.

0:44:34.160 --> 0:44:36.799
<v Speaker 1>Yes, that too. So we do have a story we

0:44:36.800 --> 0:44:39.160
<v Speaker 1>can tell about why planes fly. And I think the

0:44:39.200 --> 0:44:41.759
<v Speaker 1>best way to think about why a wing goes up

0:44:41.960 --> 0:44:44.000
<v Speaker 1>is to focus on pressure, pressure above the wing and

0:44:44.040 --> 0:44:47.720
<v Speaker 1>pressure below the wing. Fundamentally, wing goes up because pressure

0:44:47.800 --> 0:44:50.839
<v Speaker 1>grows below the wing and pressure falls above the wing.

0:44:51.320 --> 0:44:53.640
<v Speaker 1>And both of these are contributed to by the Bernoulli

0:44:53.719 --> 0:44:54.920
<v Speaker 1>and the Newton story.

0:44:55.200 --> 0:44:57.799
<v Speaker 3>Got it, Okay, we managed to summarize something in like

0:44:57.840 --> 0:44:59.480
<v Speaker 3>three or four sentences.

0:45:00.200 --> 0:45:01.640
<v Speaker 1>But we can also dig into it in a little

0:45:01.640 --> 0:45:04.040
<v Speaker 1>bit more detail, you know, like why does pressure grow

0:45:04.120 --> 0:45:06.640
<v Speaker 1>below the wing? Well, Newton tells us to focus on

0:45:06.640 --> 0:45:09.200
<v Speaker 1>the angle of attack, right, and that's correct. The wing

0:45:09.360 --> 0:45:12.160
<v Speaker 1>goes through the air, and the angle of attack pushes

0:45:12.200 --> 0:45:14.239
<v Speaker 1>down on the air, and the air pushes back, and

0:45:14.280 --> 0:45:16.720
<v Speaker 1>this is pressure. Just like if you're scooping up snow

0:45:16.800 --> 0:45:19.200
<v Speaker 1>with a snowshovel, right, this is going to be increase pressure.

0:45:19.239 --> 0:45:21.680
<v Speaker 1>The snow is going to get compacted. So why does

0:45:21.719 --> 0:45:24.840
<v Speaker 1>pressure form below the wing? Not that controversial. It's the

0:45:24.880 --> 0:45:26.280
<v Speaker 1>angle of attack that's crucial.

0:45:26.360 --> 0:45:27.759
<v Speaker 3>And as long as you go like this and you

0:45:27.800 --> 0:45:29.279
<v Speaker 3>just don't look at the top part of the wing,

0:45:29.480 --> 0:45:31.080
<v Speaker 3>and so I'm covering the top part of my eyes

0:45:31.080 --> 0:45:32.560
<v Speaker 3>and you don't think about the top part of the wing,

0:45:32.640 --> 0:45:35.400
<v Speaker 3>then everything is good. But we don't understand what's happening above?

0:45:35.520 --> 0:45:37.640
<v Speaker 1>Is that right well above the wing? We can also

0:45:37.719 --> 0:45:40.760
<v Speaker 1>think about the pressure. The Newton story can't explain what's happening,

0:45:40.840 --> 0:45:42.440
<v Speaker 1>but if you think about it in terms of fluid

0:45:42.440 --> 0:45:45.280
<v Speaker 1>you can. Right, So what's happening above the wing? Initially,

0:45:45.280 --> 0:45:47.480
<v Speaker 1>if you just like shoot air above the wing, then

0:45:47.480 --> 0:45:50.120
<v Speaker 1>it wants to flow straight back, which effectively creates like

0:45:50.160 --> 0:45:53.279
<v Speaker 1>a vacuum underneath. The angle of attack, working together with

0:45:53.360 --> 0:45:56.120
<v Speaker 1>the shape of the wing, creates this low pressure zone

0:45:56.200 --> 0:45:58.480
<v Speaker 1>above the wing because the air needs to go down

0:45:58.600 --> 0:46:01.520
<v Speaker 1>to flow onto that right. So that's exactly what happens,

0:46:01.640 --> 0:46:03.880
<v Speaker 1>is you create this low pressure zone, which is like

0:46:03.960 --> 0:46:06.520
<v Speaker 1>a vacuum. It pulls the air into it, and that's

0:46:06.600 --> 0:46:09.560
<v Speaker 1>pulling the wing up. So you have low pressure above

0:46:09.600 --> 0:46:12.200
<v Speaker 1>the wing created by the shape of the wing and

0:46:12.520 --> 0:46:15.680
<v Speaker 1>the angle of attack, which creates low pressure above it.

0:46:16.000 --> 0:46:18.319
<v Speaker 1>And so these two effects work in harmony. You have

0:46:18.360 --> 0:46:21.840
<v Speaker 1>a force from below and you have like suction from above.

0:46:22.200 --> 0:46:24.520
<v Speaker 1>So wings go up not just because the air below

0:46:24.560 --> 0:46:26.680
<v Speaker 1>them is pushing them up, but the air above them

0:46:26.760 --> 0:46:28.560
<v Speaker 1>is sucking them up into the sky.

0:46:29.160 --> 0:46:31.160
<v Speaker 4>So the Germans got the top right and the British

0:46:31.160 --> 0:46:31.920
<v Speaker 4>got the bottom right.

0:46:32.239 --> 0:46:32.719
<v Speaker 9>Is that right?

0:46:33.760 --> 0:46:34.000
<v Speaker 1>Okay?

0:46:34.000 --> 0:46:35.480
<v Speaker 3>I feel like there's so many times where I hear

0:46:35.520 --> 0:46:37.239
<v Speaker 3>that there's a debate and there's people on this side

0:46:37.239 --> 0:46:39.000
<v Speaker 3>and people on that side, and five years later the

0:46:39.000 --> 0:46:41.239
<v Speaker 3>answer is almost always, oh, they were both right, and

0:46:41.280 --> 0:46:45.080
<v Speaker 3>it's some combination of things, but okay, cool.

0:46:45.400 --> 0:46:47.719
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, And so mostly this comes from the shape of

0:46:47.760 --> 0:46:49.800
<v Speaker 1>the front of the wing. Right. Now, the shape of

0:46:49.800 --> 0:46:52.799
<v Speaker 1>the wing is important because you want to minimize drag. Right,

0:46:52.800 --> 0:46:54.759
<v Speaker 1>the Newton folks tell you the shape doesn't matter. All

0:46:54.760 --> 0:46:56.560
<v Speaker 1>that matters is you get the force from the bottom

0:46:56.840 --> 0:46:58.800
<v Speaker 1>but what you want is to create low pressure on

0:46:58.840 --> 0:47:01.800
<v Speaker 1>the top without creating a lot of drag and without

0:47:01.800 --> 0:47:05.000
<v Speaker 1>creating this turbulence zone which gives you a stall. So

0:47:05.080 --> 0:47:07.360
<v Speaker 1>that's why you have this shape. You have this shape

0:47:07.400 --> 0:47:08.880
<v Speaker 1>in the front of the wing to give you this

0:47:09.000 --> 0:47:12.120
<v Speaker 1>uneven pressure distribution, so you get low pressure but not

0:47:12.200 --> 0:47:14.239
<v Speaker 1>so much that you get a stall. And then you

0:47:14.320 --> 0:47:17.680
<v Speaker 1>have this smooth ending so the flow comes together nicely

0:47:17.719 --> 0:47:20.440
<v Speaker 1>without creating turbulence at the end. So the shape of

0:47:20.480 --> 0:47:23.399
<v Speaker 1>an airfoil and the angle of the attack is optimized

0:47:23.560 --> 0:47:27.120
<v Speaker 1>to give you smooth flow, low pressure above the wing,

0:47:27.520 --> 0:47:30.160
<v Speaker 1>and to minimize drag, which is important if you want

0:47:30.200 --> 0:47:30.759
<v Speaker 1>to take off.

0:47:31.000 --> 0:47:32.480
<v Speaker 3>I feel like the next time I get out of flight,

0:47:32.520 --> 0:47:35.040
<v Speaker 3>I'm going to appreciate it all much more, having a

0:47:35.080 --> 0:47:36.440
<v Speaker 3>better sense of how this all works.

0:47:37.560 --> 0:47:39.880
<v Speaker 1>But you know, in terms of coming to this explanation,

0:47:40.200 --> 0:47:43.480
<v Speaker 1>the experts still are arguing about, like how to summarize this.

0:47:43.840 --> 0:47:46.160
<v Speaker 1>I've given you sort of a summary version of it,

0:47:46.440 --> 0:47:48.799
<v Speaker 1>but I'm sure there are aeronautical engineers out there who

0:47:48.880 --> 0:47:51.120
<v Speaker 1>have differing opinions and are going to write into us

0:47:52.360 --> 0:47:54.960
<v Speaker 1>with their theory for why planes fly, or at least

0:47:55.000 --> 0:47:58.320
<v Speaker 1>for how to describe it. Our original listener Tom Johnson

0:47:58.600 --> 0:48:01.239
<v Speaker 1>wrote in because he saw this video from the Smithsonian

0:48:01.320 --> 0:48:04.319
<v Speaker 1>Air and Space Museum that explained it in terms of

0:48:04.440 --> 0:48:07.960
<v Speaker 1>just Bernoulli right, the Bernoulli explanation of low pressure on top,

0:48:08.280 --> 0:48:10.600
<v Speaker 1>and he wasn't satisfied with this, and he wrote to

0:48:10.640 --> 0:48:13.560
<v Speaker 1>me and he said, quote, I contacted the Smithsonian about

0:48:13.560 --> 0:48:17.160
<v Speaker 1>this video, voicing my concerns, and I was told unequivocally

0:48:17.360 --> 0:48:21.319
<v Speaker 1>that it's their policy that Berneulli makes planes fly. I

0:48:21.360 --> 0:48:23.839
<v Speaker 1>wasn't aware that physics cared about policies, but I guess

0:48:23.880 --> 0:48:24.640
<v Speaker 1>I'm mistaken.

0:48:26.840 --> 0:48:30.080
<v Speaker 4>That's amazing. Institutions are fantastic.

0:48:31.600 --> 0:48:34.840
<v Speaker 1>Exactly. And so again, you know, while the microphysics is

0:48:34.920 --> 0:48:36.799
<v Speaker 1>clear about what's happening around the wing and you can

0:48:36.840 --> 0:48:39.799
<v Speaker 1>track these individual particles, we still do struggle a little

0:48:39.840 --> 0:48:43.120
<v Speaker 1>bit coming up with a simple explanation. It turns out

0:48:43.280 --> 0:48:46.360
<v Speaker 1>pressure is important, and velocity is important, and the forces

0:48:46.400 --> 0:48:49.200
<v Speaker 1>are important. So none of the sort of classic simple

0:48:49.239 --> 0:48:52.640
<v Speaker 1>explanations can describe everything that's happening around a wing. You

0:48:52.719 --> 0:48:55.840
<v Speaker 1>need a more complex, a fuller description of what's happening

0:48:55.880 --> 0:48:59.040
<v Speaker 1>to explain all the phenomena why planes can fly upside down,

0:48:59.160 --> 0:49:02.080
<v Speaker 1>Why the pressure goes down above the wing. All this

0:49:02.160 --> 0:49:04.400
<v Speaker 1>kind of stuff. So in the end the British and

0:49:04.440 --> 0:49:05.800
<v Speaker 1>the Germans have to work together.

0:49:06.200 --> 0:49:07.799
<v Speaker 4>Ah, I mean that's better in the end.

0:49:08.920 --> 0:49:12.480
<v Speaker 3>So those plane wing shapes, So I'm thinking of other

0:49:12.520 --> 0:49:15.120
<v Speaker 3>instances where you've got like things moving through the air.

0:49:15.160 --> 0:49:16.040
<v Speaker 4>So we've got like.

0:49:16.280 --> 0:49:19.600
<v Speaker 3>Wind turbines, and then you've got racing cars. They don't

0:49:19.600 --> 0:49:21.080
<v Speaker 3>want to go up, they want to go down, so

0:49:21.120 --> 0:49:23.359
<v Speaker 3>they do the whole shape in reverse. Like, how has

0:49:23.400 --> 0:49:25.359
<v Speaker 3>this information been used in other contexts?

0:49:25.840 --> 0:49:28.839
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, exactly. So Formula one cars, they have a wing

0:49:28.880 --> 0:49:31.080
<v Speaker 1>in the back, but that wing pushes the car down

0:49:31.520 --> 0:49:34.160
<v Speaker 1>so that it maintains friction because they need friction in

0:49:34.239 --> 0:49:36.600
<v Speaker 1>order to go forward. Right, the wheels have to get

0:49:36.600 --> 0:49:38.719
<v Speaker 1>pushed onto the ground so the wheels can grab and

0:49:38.719 --> 0:49:40.840
<v Speaker 1>then when they turn the wheels, the car goes forward.

0:49:41.239 --> 0:49:43.160
<v Speaker 1>If the car lifts up above the ground, then it

0:49:43.200 --> 0:49:45.960
<v Speaker 1>can't move forward anymore. So they design it in order

0:49:46.000 --> 0:49:50.160
<v Speaker 1>to generate downward pressure, so they have crucially a different angle, right,

0:49:50.160 --> 0:49:52.000
<v Speaker 1>But they also think about the foil and they do

0:49:52.200 --> 0:49:55.960
<v Speaker 1>really complex modeling because you know, millions of dollars mean

0:49:56.080 --> 0:49:58.760
<v Speaker 1>microseconds and that it's the difference between winning and losing.

0:49:59.200 --> 0:50:01.640
<v Speaker 1>So yeah, absolutely, they invert all of this theory in

0:50:01.760 --> 0:50:04.120
<v Speaker 1>order to get a wing that can push down. And

0:50:04.160 --> 0:50:06.520
<v Speaker 1>the crucial thing there is the angle of attack, right.

0:50:06.760 --> 0:50:09.560
<v Speaker 3>And then wind turbines. They don't want the wind turbine

0:50:09.560 --> 0:50:12.640
<v Speaker 3>to go airborne, but they want it to spin as

0:50:12.680 --> 0:50:15.440
<v Speaker 3>fast as it can, which feels like maybe some of

0:50:15.440 --> 0:50:17.720
<v Speaker 3>the principles we talked about today could help that happen.

0:50:18.560 --> 0:50:20.200
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, how does this plant to wind turbines?

0:50:20.400 --> 0:50:23.120
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, exactly, Well, it's the same principle. Essentially, you have

0:50:23.280 --> 0:50:26.360
<v Speaker 1>air flow across the propeller and you want to convert

0:50:26.400 --> 0:50:29.200
<v Speaker 1>that to a sideways force, right, So you want to

0:50:29.280 --> 0:50:32.040
<v Speaker 1>force up relative to the propeller. You don't want the

0:50:32.080 --> 0:50:34.880
<v Speaker 1>whole propeller to fly abof the ground, right, but you

0:50:34.880 --> 0:50:38.319
<v Speaker 1>wanted to spin around the axis, and so again the

0:50:38.400 --> 0:50:41.480
<v Speaker 1>angle of attack and the shape of it ensures a

0:50:41.560 --> 0:50:44.919
<v Speaker 1>force that turns it and smooth flow around it because

0:50:44.920 --> 0:50:47.760
<v Speaker 1>you don't want turbulence in the back of your propeller blade.

0:50:48.080 --> 0:50:51.640
<v Speaker 1>So each one of those is essentially just a little wingh.

0:50:51.160 --> 0:50:54.120
<v Speaker 3>Very cool and guessing that we weren't racing cars before

0:50:54.480 --> 0:50:57.800
<v Speaker 3>we had planes, so probably the plane stuff came first.

0:50:58.200 --> 0:51:00.760
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, the plane stuff came first. Cars were pretty slow

0:51:00.840 --> 0:51:03.560
<v Speaker 1>until kind of recently, Like you could win big car

0:51:03.640 --> 0:51:05.759
<v Speaker 1>races by driving it like forty five miles an hour

0:51:05.840 --> 0:51:07.120
<v Speaker 1>for many years.

0:51:06.960 --> 0:51:09.680
<v Speaker 3>That sounds so cute. Now it's much harder to die

0:51:09.719 --> 0:51:13.080
<v Speaker 3>at that speed. Why would you watch that exactly?

0:51:13.640 --> 0:51:16.040
<v Speaker 1>But it's really fun to think about how we explain

0:51:16.120 --> 0:51:19.279
<v Speaker 1>the world around us, and how challenging it can be

0:51:19.360 --> 0:51:22.480
<v Speaker 1>to explain some things. It makes me really grateful for

0:51:22.600 --> 0:51:25.360
<v Speaker 1>the times that we can find a very simple explanation

0:51:26.040 --> 0:51:29.240
<v Speaker 1>and wonder like why that's possible sometimes and not other times.

0:51:29.320 --> 0:51:31.640
<v Speaker 1>Is it because the way that we think about the world,

0:51:32.120 --> 0:51:34.360
<v Speaker 1>or is it just something about the way the world works?

0:51:34.719 --> 0:51:37.960
<v Speaker 1>You know, alien scientists have a better theory for why

0:51:38.080 --> 0:51:40.759
<v Speaker 1>wings work because they started off from a completely different

0:51:40.800 --> 0:51:44.280
<v Speaker 1>point of view mathematically or scientifically. Or is everybody struggling

0:51:44.360 --> 0:51:47.880
<v Speaker 1>to describe some complex behaviors? Are these things just inherently

0:51:47.960 --> 0:51:51.080
<v Speaker 1>complex or is it just our language that's making them

0:51:51.120 --> 0:51:51.799
<v Speaker 1>a challenge?

0:51:51.960 --> 0:51:54.680
<v Speaker 3>I wonder if part of that is there some percent

0:51:54.760 --> 0:51:57.080
<v Speaker 3>of explanations that we have that we feel good about

0:51:57.080 --> 0:51:59.360
<v Speaker 3>that are actually wrong if you look at them more closely.

0:52:00.120 --> 0:52:01.040
<v Speaker 4>Stuff works anyway.

0:52:01.520 --> 0:52:03.640
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, and then I wonder if some other stuff just

0:52:03.680 --> 0:52:05.680
<v Speaker 3>there happens to be a metaphor that we're familiar with

0:52:05.719 --> 0:52:07.040
<v Speaker 3>that makes it easier to understand.

0:52:07.080 --> 0:52:08.920
<v Speaker 4>And there's just not like a ready metaphor for some

0:52:08.960 --> 0:52:10.600
<v Speaker 4>of the more complicated things.

0:52:10.640 --> 0:52:14.239
<v Speaker 1>But yeah, and sometimes we accept an explanation even though

0:52:14.280 --> 0:52:17.000
<v Speaker 1>it's nonsense, like the air has to go faster over

0:52:17.040 --> 0:52:19.520
<v Speaker 1>the top of the wing to meet its partners. Like

0:52:19.560 --> 0:52:21.400
<v Speaker 1>a lot of people go, oh huh, yeah, that makes sense,

0:52:21.520 --> 0:52:21.839
<v Speaker 1>but it.

0:52:21.800 --> 0:52:25.280
<v Speaker 9>Doesn't actually make sense, you know, yep.

0:52:25.719 --> 0:52:29.759
<v Speaker 1>And fundamentally, all of science is quote unquote wrong. If

0:52:29.800 --> 0:52:32.480
<v Speaker 1>you zoom in far enough, you know, everything is just

0:52:32.520 --> 0:52:36.040
<v Speaker 1>an approximate description, not like scientists are lying to us

0:52:36.160 --> 0:52:39.840
<v Speaker 1>or we're promoting nonsense, but everything is an approximation, even

0:52:39.880 --> 0:52:43.640
<v Speaker 1>like describe an electron as a fundamental particle, Yeah, probably

0:52:43.640 --> 0:52:45.840
<v Speaker 1>it's not. Probably it's made of something smaller. We just

0:52:45.840 --> 0:52:48.600
<v Speaker 1>haven't seen it yet. But our theory works so far,

0:52:49.000 --> 0:52:51.360
<v Speaker 1>we've never been able to make an experiment where it breaks.

0:52:51.400 --> 0:52:53.480
<v Speaker 1>And so all of science is a work in progress

0:52:53.520 --> 0:52:55.719
<v Speaker 1>in that sense, not just like do we have the

0:52:55.760 --> 0:52:58.399
<v Speaker 1>best explanation for it? But you know, how far can

0:52:58.400 --> 0:53:00.919
<v Speaker 1>we push this until we see it break. And seeing

0:53:01.000 --> 0:53:03.800
<v Speaker 1>it break is an opportunity, right, It's not a disaster.

0:53:03.880 --> 0:53:06.720
<v Speaker 1>It's a chance to learn something deeper about the universe,

0:53:06.760 --> 0:53:09.600
<v Speaker 1>to come up with a more accurate description, or to

0:53:09.680 --> 0:53:12.640
<v Speaker 1>poke through reality to another level and see how it

0:53:12.680 --> 0:53:15.480
<v Speaker 1>works underneath it all. So it's just part of the

0:53:15.560 --> 0:53:16.320
<v Speaker 1>journey of science.

0:53:16.800 --> 0:53:18.640
<v Speaker 3>I feel like it's a great time to be in science.

0:53:18.680 --> 0:53:22.239
<v Speaker 3>There's still so many fundamental things left to understand at

0:53:22.239 --> 0:53:24.719
<v Speaker 3>the same time as we gaining all this new technology

0:53:24.760 --> 0:53:27.120
<v Speaker 3>that allows us to address questions in different ways.

0:53:27.200 --> 0:53:29.399
<v Speaker 4>We have all these new tools. Can't wait to see

0:53:29.440 --> 0:53:30.760
<v Speaker 4>what we learn in the next couple decades.

0:53:31.239 --> 0:53:33.600
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and it's not just like what's inside an electron,

0:53:33.680 --> 0:53:36.480
<v Speaker 1>like weird, abstract fundamental stuff that you'll ever see. It's

0:53:36.520 --> 0:53:38.239
<v Speaker 1>stuff right in front of you, stuff you can see

0:53:38.280 --> 0:53:41.640
<v Speaker 1>with your eyes. You know, tornadoes and hurricanes and airplanes

0:53:42.080 --> 0:53:45.360
<v Speaker 1>and fluid flow. All this stuff is complex and unsolved.

0:53:45.400 --> 0:53:48.160
<v Speaker 1>So smart young people with energy out there go out

0:53:48.160 --> 0:53:52.719
<v Speaker 1>there figure it out. There's lots left to do, so

0:53:52.719 --> 0:53:54.600
<v Speaker 1>thank you very much to Tom Johnson for sending us

0:53:54.680 --> 0:53:56.960
<v Speaker 1>this question. If you have questions about the way the

0:53:56.960 --> 0:54:00.239
<v Speaker 1>world works or why you can't understand it. Please write

0:54:00.239 --> 0:54:02.520
<v Speaker 1>to us two Questions at Daniel and Kelly dot org.

0:54:02.760 --> 0:54:04.040
<v Speaker 1>We love to hear from you.

0:54:04.239 --> 0:54:12.480
<v Speaker 4>Thanks Tom.

0:54:12.600 --> 0:54:16.160
<v Speaker 3>Daniel and Kelly's Extraordinary Universe is produced by iHeartRadio.

0:54:16.360 --> 0:54:18.920
<v Speaker 4>We would love to hear from you, We really would.

0:54:19.080 --> 0:54:21.839
<v Speaker 1>We want to know what questions you have about this

0:54:22.000 --> 0:54:23.680
<v Speaker 1>Extraordinary Universe.

0:54:23.800 --> 0:54:26.759
<v Speaker 3>We want to know your thoughts on recent shows, suggestions

0:54:26.760 --> 0:54:27.760
<v Speaker 3>for future shows.

0:54:27.880 --> 0:54:30.239
<v Speaker 4>If you contact us, we will get back to you.

0:54:30.440 --> 0:54:33.960
<v Speaker 1>We really mean it. We answer every message. Email us

0:54:34.000 --> 0:54:37.080
<v Speaker 1>at Questions at danieland Kelly dot org, or.

0:54:37.080 --> 0:54:38.320
<v Speaker 4>You can find us on social media.

0:54:38.400 --> 0:54:42.200
<v Speaker 3>We have accounts on x, Instagram, Blue Sky and on

0:54:42.280 --> 0:54:43.200
<v Speaker 3>all of those platforms.

0:54:43.239 --> 0:54:46.200
<v Speaker 4>You can find us at d and kuniverse.

0:54:46.320 --> 0:54:47.839
<v Speaker 1>Don't be shy, write to us