Common misconceptions

[GTENVY]

Just to throw the cat among the pigeons...

Holden is Awestralyn mate.

[Airmon]

Originally Posted by ST

General relativity and the impossibility to accelerate at or faster than the speed of light are Einstein theories (since we are on a thread of clearing misconceptions).

Im a little unclear as to which you're trying to clear?
That you can or can't go faster then the speed of light?

[HLC]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

We are not biting on that one

What about, Boss V8's handle like crap... oh wait thats no misconception!!

i kid i kid ;)

[HLC]

Originally Posted by Airmon

Im a little unclear as to which you're trying to clear?
That you can or can't go faster then the speed of light?

that in itself would depend on what frame of reference that you were travelling in.

example

You travelling on a train moving at a velocity of 30kph, throw a ball directly ahead, which you see to be moving at a velocity of 30kph.

To an outside, stationary, witness viewing the train at a perpendicular angle, they will see said ball travelling at a velocity of 60kph. 30 + 30 = 60, even though you, on the train, only measure the ball at 30kph, because in your eyes, your frame of reference (the train) is stationary- that is, if you are not measuring it's movement off ANOTHER external frame of reference. Ie, the witness viewing the train!

[JC]

Threads in the pub are full of useful information!

[xy500]

Originally Posted by flappist

But then neither is anything that disagrees with current academic agenda regardless of how accurate it is.

ha! where'd you get this idea? academic agenda is irrelevant and is easily swayed with some strong references to back your point.
Misconception: university is for teaching
(its for learning)

[GTENVY]

Originally Posted by JC

Threads in the pub are full of useful information!

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by JC

Threads in the pub are full of useful information!

Biggest misconception yet, I would go as far to say complete fallacy.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by HLC

What about, Boss V8's handle like crap... oh wait thats no misconception!!

i kid i kid ;)

I told you, I am not biting on such inflammatory comments. Anyway I have an F6 now, Boss's are slow and handle like crap



I was just kidding everyone

[Ben73]

2 cars having a head on at 100km/h will create the impact forces of 200km/h.

Apparently each car will only feel the impact of 100km/h. Heard they tested it on myth busters. No idea how it works though. Never looked into it.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by Ben73

2 cars having a head on at 100km/h will create the impact forces of 200km/h.

Apparently each car will only feel the impact of 100km/h. Heard they tested it on myth busters. No idea how it works though. Never looked into it.

This was done to death on a 16 page thread a while ago. It seems the effect for each car would be as if they had hit a stationary and immovable object at 100 km/h. That is provided that both cars had precisely the same velocity, mass and structural features.

[RedHotGT]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

This was done to death on a 16 page thread a while ago. It seems the effect for each car would be as if they had hit a stationary and immovable object at 100 km/h. That is provided that both cars had precisely the same velocity, mass and structural features.

Which - as we all know - will NEVER happen...

[mrbaxr6t]

another misconception :
a pursuit commo with a "cop chip" goes faster than the mach 5

and no bites on my other one, maybe I didnt need the bomb shelter afterall

[bungarra]

Misconception is the Smart for two cars are really Smart!!

[TC200six]

A car with a Holden badge on it must mean it's built in Australia.

So many more misconceptions, but they're not car related. Could a similar thread be created in The Bar section?

[JimNiki]

Originally Posted by LXL15

Speed doesn't kill...acceleration (or deceleration ie, crashing) does. You could accelerate at 1m/s^2 for ten years and not die, until you start approaching the speed of light and relativity takes over from Newtonian physics, of course...then again, if you're not shielded from the air (or whatever is trying to slow you down) you could get squashed...like being run over while lying on the ground...

At that acceleration rate, it'll only take minutes to overtake the enterprise at warp factor 13 ...

it's like the story of the grain of rice on the first square of a chess board.
2 on the next square, 4 on the next , 16 on the next, etc.

Basically you run out of rice on earth to fill the last square...

[Airmon]

Originally Posted by HLC

that in itself would depend on what frame of reference that you were travelling in.

example

You travelling on a train moving at a velocity of 30kph, throw a ball directly ahead, which you see to be moving at a velocity of 30kph.

Yeah special relativity, which also states that you cannot accelerate to the speed of light.
Which has been around and known for years, I'm not aware of any theories to disprove Einstein conclusively, hence my confusion at his point.

I thought it was fairly common knowledge that you can't obtain a velocity above the speed of light so is he saying you can or can't??

[Cooper69S]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Although the wording of the legislation states "give way to vehicles in the roundabout", it effectively means give way to the right (because cars in the roundabout are on the right). The legislation does not allow you to race another car to the roundabout and it is not a "first in best dressed" arrangement.

Having said that, if you can safely enter the roundabout and exit without disrupting other cars, you can do so even though another car may be approaching the roundabout on your right. The problem is if you misjudge it and a collision occurs, 99% of the time you will be in the wrong.

cars in the roundabout doesn't necessarily equal on the right - a long vehicle can enter a roundabout to your left and is not considered to have "cut you off" as they're already in the roundabout you have to wait.

There was a case in the news here a couple of years ago. a woman entered a roundabout, a speeding vehicle entered to her right after her and they collided. the court found her in the wrong as she should have given way to her right, even though the other driver was speeding. it apparently took her 2 appeals to have that verdict changed and to have herself cleared.

The rules are pretty unambiguous. If you enter the roundabout first, you have right of way - since you are then "in the roundabout" and anyone else - to the right or otherwise must give way to you. Hard to see how they can get that wrong. The point I suppose is the old choice between rights and self-preservation. It is your right to enter if there is a vehicle to the right which hasn't quite reached the roundabout - even if that vehicle is speeding. However you're probably better off waiting and avoiding the hassle of a collision. Unless the right hand side of your car could do with a respray at someone else's expense, then go right ahead and let them run into you - just hope you survive it.

also it would usually be pretty clear who was in the right if there was a collision. Someone actually failing to give way to a vehicle already in the roundabout to their right would probably be hit in the front quarter. If they were in first and got hit it would probably be the rear quarter, unless they're going VERY slowly...

Originally Posted by prydey

there's not a lot of difference between that, and the old 'give way to the right' rule. some people think the new rule means they can just barge in if there's 1 car length of free space.

I suppose that in the majority of cases where people aren't speeding 1 car length is enough so that it wouldn't be considered "barging in" - traffic would probably just flow nicely. Which is what roundabouts are supposed to achieve. People unnecessarily waiting for cars approaching from the right are probably responsible for a lot of traffic congestion...

I do think there are way too many people who don't understand roundabouts. I got to one the other day where the other 3 entries to the roundabout had cars all sitting there waiting for each other. the bloke to my left should have gone as I hadn't reached the roundabout yet. I just went through and then they all went on their way. I wondered what might have happened if another person like them had been in my position and had stopped there. They'd be gridlocked. They might have been still there now like those 2 Dr Seuss characters...

[FPV+fteT3]

Roundabouts = chicane enter at speed and straightline hitting the apex even if you have to use all the available lanes.

They are not chicanes but some people use them as such.

[ST]

Originally Posted by Airmon

Yeah special relativity, which also states that you cannot accelerate to the speed of light.
Which has been around and known for years, I'm not aware of any theories to disprove Einstein conclusively, hence my confusion at his point.

I thought it was fairly common knowledge that you can't obtain a velocity above the speed of light so is he saying you can or can't??

Ah yes, I had misread the post above me. I thought LXL15 had stated that relativity and the inability to exceed the speed of light were Newtonian physics, missed the part where he said "takes over from".

My bad!

[Crazy Dazz]

Common Misconception: Korea can make cars.

[ST]

^The latest range of Hyundai cars strongly disagree with you. Hell even Kia have improved greatly.

[dylancox]

Misconception:

Scenario A: You were travelling at 50km/h and you hit a pedestrian
Scenario B: 5km/h slower and the pedestrian would have had a bruised leg

In Scenario B, the pedestrian would have crossed the road before the driver encountered him/her. Isn't time linear and it doesn't wait for events to happen, unless Road Safety experts believe in 'Fate' and the collision as predestined to happen.

In all common sense, the ad should read: 'If the driver was paying more attention to the road than his speedometer, and driving to the conditions, the pedestrian would have arrived home safely'... or better still 'Look left and right before you cross the street'.

[Crazy Dazz]

Originally Posted by ST

^The latest range of Hyundai cars strongly disagree with you. Hell even Kia have improved greatly.

One word for you:
Daewoo

[Crazy Dazz]

Originally Posted by dylancox

Misconception:

Scenario A: You were travelling at 50km/h and you hit a pedestrian
Scenario B: 5km/h slower and the pedestrian would have had a bruised leg

To that I would add the misconception that a bunch of fart-sniffing bureaucrats in Brussels, who know absolutely nothing about cars, making a bunch of pansy-**** design rules,
Can make an iota of difference when a car smashes into a Human Body.
Cars and pedestrians don’t mix. We should do everything we can to keep them apart, not penalise motorists.
There’s also no point imposing restrictions on cars, when buses and trucks are on the road.

[ST]

Ok? That counters what I have said how?

Stating Korea as a whole can't make cars because of one manufacturer is a massive generalisation and has been proven wrong by the two given examples.

Very common misconception: Korea can't make cars.

[302 XC]

Misconception

Getting hit by a 3 tonne 4x4 without a bullbar wont hurt or kill you

Getting hit by a 3 tonne 4x4 with a bullbar will hurt and kill you

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

One word for you:
Daewoo

Yes but if you took TRD Aurion as the example then Australia cant make performance cars either can it?

[DJM83]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

I have one for you.

The Daddy long legs spider (Pholcidae) is the most venomous spider in Australia but its fangs are too short to puncture skin.

Urban myth, the spider does have fangs that can cause a bite with envenomation but bites are exceptionally rare. If it does bite the venom only causes mild skin irritation.

What does that have to do with cars? Absolutely nothing but I thought it was interesting when I first heard about it. You never know, you might find one in your car and now you know it won't kill you. See it is something to do with cars.

So they arent entirely harmful to humans then, didnt know that thanks mate.

[Yellow_Festiva]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Common Misconception: Korea can make cars.

Another common Misconception:

That Korean cars have not changed in safety, build quality and design since the early 90's.