btrettel comments on Decoherence is Simple - Less Wrong

20 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 06 May 2008 07:44AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (57)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: btrettel 11 August 2015 02:32:12AM *  1 point [-]

The "teardrop" shape is pretty good, though the name is a fair bit misleading as droplets almost never look like that. Their shape varies in time depending on the flow conditions.

Not quite sure what you mean by spindle shape, but I'm sure a variety of shapes like that could be pretty good. For the front, it's important to not have a flat tip. For the back, you'd want a gradual decay of the radius to prevent the fluid from separating off the back, creating a large wake. These are the heuristics.

Which shape objects have minimum drag is a fairly interesting subject. The shape with minimum wave drag (i.e., supersonic flow) is known, but I'm not sure there are any general proofs for other flow regimes. Perhaps it doesn't matter much, as we already know a bunch of shapes with low drag. The real problem seems to be getting these shapes adopted, as (for example) cars don't seem to be bought on rational bases like engineering. This should not be surprising.

Comment author: Lumifer 11 August 2015 04:21:05AM 1 point [-]

cars don't seem to be bought on rational bases like engineering.

Of course, but I don't see it as a bad thing. Typically when people buy cars they have a collection of must-haves and then from the short list of cars matching the must-haves, they pick what they like. I think it's a perfectly fine method of picking cars. Compare to picking clothes, for example...