doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Pattern theory

Wonderful and non-quantified. It's VERY obvious to me that it was well intended and VERY obvious that it must have been fun. It is also VERY obvious that some real science was thot about but it's VERY obvious that it was not realized. I think it's VERY obvious that it is necessary for quantifiable data be obtained and usually upon analysis that makes some justifiable conclusions VERY obvious.

Aside from a number of other aspects of the methodology that I'd be curious about, it's VERY obvious to me that I would like to know if post-shooting, after the pellets were segregated on the basis of the paint color was the paint removed and the condition of the pellets assessed (altho VERY obviously not quantifiably) or was the painted surface the subject of the findings?
inquiring minds and all that, y'know

And to the person that thinks the shape of a mass affects its inertia - I'll agree that you are not ignorant since that contention in the light of the 21stCentury (really, the 17thCentury) is just stupid.
Sir Isaac Newton also observed this:
"I can calculate the motion of heavenly bodies, but not the madness of people."

have another day
Dr.WtS

The shape of a mass affects its coefficient of drag. So a 1/480th of an ounce piece of lead in a thin plate shape will have much higher drag than a 1/480th of an ounce piece of lead in a tear drop shape. But both would have the same mass, inertia, and momentum, everything else being equal. If both left the muzzle at 1200 fps the plate shape would then slow down much faster than the tear drop shaped mass. Both had the same inertia before the shell was fired and the same momentum at the muzzle. After that the tear drop mass would maintain its velocity and momentum at higher values than the flat plate mass because its drag was less than the plate.

The shot at the bottom of the shot column are under more stress for the same reason the pressure at the bottom of the ocean is much higher than the pressure at the surface. Acceleration of the shot column taking the place of the earth's gravitational field in the ocean.

I thought this was about what shot does when it clears the muzzle of a shotgun. Are you thinking that an ounce of #8's that are fired off in the direction of the sky put a few hundred little asteroids into a predictable orbit? I checked all the scientific links and logical conclusions that you provided, and it still doesn't seem quite right. What am I missing?

"What am I missing?"

A life?

Did you know Isaac Newton's kid brother Robert (aka Bobbie Figs) invented a cookie?


_______________________
Figs! Huh!! What are they good for? (making delicious cookies)

Little known fact - Bobby Figs, with the assistance of Isaac, invented a time machine. That's why the cookie came so many years later. I ran into Bobby twice. The first time at an Exploited concert in London and then at a comicon. He was doing JabbatheHut cosplay. Cool dude for his age.

have another day
Dr.WtS

little asteroids hahahaha that is really funny

WTS, your argument is resembles a Monty Python skit of simply repeating "no it's not"

It is worthless to endeavor further with your simply negative response. Your call, as I see it, to provide the actual lab data may seem witty, but is specious, as you have failed to do the same to support you VERY arguements.

This has become another thread descended into foolishness and not worth bothering with, I wish you well

Inertia holds it in the barrel. The shot continually accelerates until it clears the muzzle. Being acclerated by the wad, the inertia of the shot causes a force on the wad toward the breech. The pressure from the hot gases from the burned / burning powder causes an opposing force on the wad and pushes the wad, and thus the shot, towards the muzzle. The force on the powder side of the wad is much greater than the force caused by the inertia on the other side of the wad. This differences accounts for the extreme acceleration of 0 to 1200fps in two and one half feet.

"Your call, as I see it, to provide the actual lab data may seem witty, but is specious, as you have failed to do the same to support you VERY arguements."

I'd be happy to do that very thing and since there is NO Real Data available you and whomever else is interested in real data just gather together and send along about $50K to cover my time/equipment costs. No Problemo.

have another day
Dr.WtS

Wonko;
I'll just save my $$$$ & continue to accept what has already been proven over a century or so of use & Ignore your "Insane" babblings. It is of course one thing to be able to quote a few formulas & altogether another to be able to understand how to apply them. It is quite obvious you have no idea of the actual application of the formula you so freely cited.

At the risk of beating a dead horse, I'm confused and would like you to explain with science why the force on a smaller gauge shot pattern is greater than on a larger gauge. I think we all probably agree that Newton got it right, and force = mass x acceleration. Given that the mass of small and larger gauge 1 oz. loads is equal, they have equal chamber pressure and assuming they both have the same muzzle velocity out of the same length barrel, are you saying that the smaller gauge accelerates faster? what would happen if you used a thicker shot cup and loaded a 20 gauge shot column in a 12 gauge shell with the same load as the 12 gauge (assuming you adjust the load slightly for the increased weight of the new shot cup)? Would the force be different than the 12 gauge loading?