At 06:00 PM 2/16/99 -0800, Michael M. Butler wrote:
>
>> IAN: Mike, what I said is what I quoted from
>> a physics book, how could that be my discovery?
>> Every basic physics book covers the same fact.
>
>Permit me to inject a few points before departing this conversation:
>
>1) Every basic physics book oversimplifies. That's why they call it "basic"
>physics.
>
>2) The independence of horizontal and vertical motion is only true in
>airless environments.
>Furthermore, the notion of "horizontal" is a local one, as is "vertical".
IAN: Michael, can you point me to a physics book that explains how the atmosphere can enable an object to fall faster than the same object dropped in a vacuum? If not, then what's your point?
My main point is that an initial horizontal velocity will not allow an object to fall faster than the fall rate in a vacuum. A few simple thought experiments confirm that. Since you appear to offer counter-points to my analysis, I'd like to understand why you felt my main point needed correction, or were you simply addressing a tangential?