What’s really neat is to see how they’re trying to replace the Int’l Std Kilo with a more “fundamental” measure of mass, like counting up (6.022*10^23)/atomic weight of atoms and weighing the results.
Sorry I was just observing that newtons approximations are great as long as v is low. With regards to the CFD you are absolutely correct. I was just saying (not very well and in a not very useful way) that the equations that are used are like maxwells equations… easy to write … hard to solve.
OK, now I understand what you’re talking about. Are you referring to the Navier Stokes equations? When you said Maxwell equations, I suddenly understood what you were trying to say.
In that sense, you are correct - the CdAdynamic pressure is not a complete description of flow field, merely a quantification of cause and effect,with Cd representing all of the elements you cannot easily quantify. And researchers are still figuring how to most accurately solve the Navier Stokes equations, which is essentially what a CFD program does (with various fudge factors for phenomena which happen at a smaller scale than its grid size, such as turbulence, certain boundary layer conditions, etc.).
OK, now I understand what you’re talking about. Are you referring to the Navier Stokes equations? When you said Maxwell equations, I suddenly understood what you were trying to say.
In that sense, you are correct - the CdAdynamic pressure is not a complete description of flow field, merely a quantification of cause and effect,with Cd representing all of the elements you cannot easily quantify. And researchers are still figuring how to most accurately solve the Navier Stokes equations, which is essentially what a CFD program does (with various fudge factors for phenomena which happen at a smaller scale than its grid size, such as turbulence, certain boundary layer conditions, etc.).
Yes on Navier Stokes (or I assume)… I just said Maxwell as a parallel to EE (as that is my background)… I believe that the equations are amazing similar… though describing completely different phenomenon… which I think is really cool.
Really I should have just remembered that subtly doesn’t really add anything to this forum… and I should have just kept my mouth shut
… I believe that the equations are amazing similar… though describing completely different phenomenon… which I think is really cool.
A field is a field…I’ve actually used a thermal finite element analysis program to solve for electrostatic field properties before…you just have to know what variables correlate to each other and keep your units straight 
Speaking of Maxwell… here is a picture of Jim Meyer (from his blog) the guy who designed the quarq power meter, with his maxwell shirt on… and to quote my fields friend “Wow, time domain integral form. Excellent. No pussy differentials or phasors for this guy.”
Speaking of Maxwell… here is a picture of Jim Meyer (from his blog) the guy who designed the quarq power meter, with his maxwell shirt on… and to quote my fields friend “Wow, time domain integral form. Excellent. No pussy differentials or phasors for this guy.”
That Newton is one cool Great Dane 