tr> Over in Klahn's echo he states in a message to you (message
 tr> #7018) that I and some others accepted his formula:

 tr> "Oh, and notice, Ross Cassell, Tim Richardson, Earl
 tr> Croasmun, as well as Frank Scheidt accepted my formula."
 tr> ......Klahn

 tr> Klahn is a baldfaced liar. I did no such thing.

 AAMOF, you did.

 In the first msg you explain the formula, with not one word of
 doubt about it.

 In the second msg you say the formula is for a body moving at a
 constant velocity, which is exactly what I intended it for.

 IOW, you accepted it without question. Which makes your comment
 about a bald faced what?
 **************************************************************************

FORUM:   Fido-Debate                          HOST: FIDOTEL
DATE:    Aug-31-08 8:00pm                     MSG:  6558
FROM:    TIM RICHARDSON
TO:      ROSS SAUER
SUBJECT: Gas prices

On 08-31-08, ROSS SAUER said to BOB KLAHN:

RS>"bob klahn -> ROSS SAUER"  wrote in
news:25378$DEBATE{at}JamNNTPd:

RS>> We actually had success, We saved (estimated) a
RS>> quarter-tank of gas.

RS>> First, we drove about 60 miles, between 65 and 70 mph.

RS>> We refilled the gas tank, and drove the same distance, at
RS>> 55 mph.

RS>> It was at 55 we saved all the gas.

bk>    F=MV^2

RS>I'm afraid I'm really lousy at math, what does this mean?

F (Force) = M (Mass) times V (Velocity)squared!


FORUM:   Fido-Crossfire --                    HOST: FIDOTEL
DATE:    Sep-5-08 5:45am                      MSG:  15325
FROM:    Tim Richardson
TO:      Jim Holsonback
SUBJECT: Gas prices

On 09-04-08, JIM HOLSONBACK said to TIM RICHARDSON:

JH>Since you're banned from the Debate echo, I'll reply here.

 I didn't notice where the conversation was taking place. I
 thought we were in Ceppa's echo.

RS>> First, we drove about 60 miles, between 65 and 70 mph.

RS>> We refilled the gas tank, and drove the same distance, at
RS>> 55 mph.

RS>> It was at 55 we saved all the gas.

bk>    F=MV^2

RS>I'm afraid I'm really lousy at math, what does this mean?

TR> F (Force) = M (Mass) times V (Velocity)squared!

JH>Not only does BK have the formula wrong, it is not applicable to the
JH>energy required to keep a vehicle is traveling at constant speed.  See
JH>my post to Frank in this packet.

JH>Reminder: the correct version of Klahn's formula is
JH>Work = F x s = 1/2 mv^2 = kinetic energy

TR> I realize that. The formula above is for a body moving at a constant
TR> velocity, isn't it?

JH>It is, but it is also correct for a given mass at a given instantaneous
JH>velocity while it accelerates or decelerates.

 By `formula above' I was refering to the formula Klahn tossed
 out there in the beginning.

TR> The situation Sauer is talking about involves a time factor, and a non-
TR> constant velocity.

JH>To simplify the situation he presented, I think it is fair to assume
JH>that the vehicle accelerated to highway speed, and pretty much held that
JH>speed for the duration of the trip.  i.e. highway driving vs city
JH>driving.

 If his `friend' were using a `cruise control', the results
 might be more acceptable.

TR> I think the above formula has to do with kinetic energy or some such.

JH>Yes, the 1/2 mv^2 side of the equation is the kinetic energy of a mass
JH>moving at a given speed.

 And the speed is `constant'.

TR> Nothing to do with fuel savings at varying speeds in limited time
TR> periods.

JH>Keeping it simple, best assume the trip was basically all at highway
JH>speeds.

 Given a distance traveled, a steady velocity of travel, and
 ignoring up and down hill motion.

 ...

 **************************************************************************

BOB KLAHN bob.klahn{at}sev.org   http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

 * Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a