Why can't a human fly?

Human powered flight had been attained, long ago -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man-powered_flight

The crafts being carefully designed to provide those bird like qualities, and

using the available human power to its greatest advantage.

No, humans cant fly intrisically. We need lots of help!

What are you guys talking about?...I can fly...but now I am working my landing....My mind is flying but when it lands to real world it always crushes....

-"Slap your woman twice a day..if you don't know the reason to do so..be sure that she knows the reason"-

I'm sure this is said in sarcasm, but many people in Australia would find this comment very offensive.

Did you know that people in other countries believe that Australian men treat their women badly? I ain't saying it's true, I'm just wondering whether you knew the word on the street.

You shmuck

I'm just asking.

A direct reply might be out of context here, so let me rephrase:

..

It's hell driving to the beach in reverse, but it's fun to watch!

WOW so intresting OMG

When there is a will, there is a way.

In France, around the turn of the century, a similar question arose in the mind a young balloon enthusiast. I do not have all the facts, as I remember only reading a digest regarding his story. When confronted with the weight problem, he went "lighter than air". As I recall, he built a pedal powered elongated balloon and peddled it around the Eiffel Tower!

If you haven't already, go to a really good restaurant and order the braised duck. Ducks are living proof that given enough horsepower, even a brick could fly.

Anyway, while you're enjoying your duck (which is really good, by the way), you'll notice the shear size of the breast! It's huge! It would make Arnold Schwinger look like Twiggy. Also, while you're at it, break a leg bone and see how much it differs from pictures of the inside of human bones. I think before the meal is done, you'll have your answer.

Man-powered machines have been created for sure, take the Gossamer Condor for example. but Your duck dinner should educate you why two cardboard wings and the roof of a barn equals a broken neck.

...given enough horsepower, even a brick could fly...

Vermin, you're my hero now!

I have been saying it for years, to no avail, but you're the first to duck the issue and still come a winner.

Why is my "...if you can't insert the part with force, don't waste energy, bring a bigger hammer..." sounds so lame, and your humble duck does it?

Maybe I'm not envious enough?

Just try to make 10 Push-ups in 5secs. If you can do this. Then probably your body supports flying. Try to lift your own body up and down for at least 10 times in 5sec.

I just observed that slow flapping birds are capable of flapping their wings at this much speed, provided they wont get tired.

Great thread! Thanks for the reminder of menace from earth, I was thinking moon is a harsh mistress...Vermin- DUCK!

Yuval, Right on.

milo

If humans lived during the period when dinosaurs roamed the Earth, they might have been able to fly. There is a theory that the atmosphere was much denser then. Unfortunately the earliest evidence of humanoids is more than 60 million years after the age of the dinosaurs.

Did anyone see the thread on inhaling Sulphur hexafluoride: - http://cr4.globalspec.com/blogentry/951/Inhaling-Sulphur-Hexafluoride. It's a non toxic gas which is 6 times as heavy (dense) as air. I wondered if you mixed it with 20% oxygen, if perhaps you would be able to fly more like a bird. In a large sealed room you could probably also double the pressure (and density) without needing to de-pressurise to avoid the bends.

Suppose you had access to a deep mine, below the surface, with a large cavern. Air pressure there would already be greater than at sea level. It would also be relatively easy to pressurize if so desired.

The analogy of the gymnist supporting himself with arms outstretched on the rings is not necessarily accurate as the support point could be moved closer to the body, perhaps at the elbows or closer. In any case, I would assume that a harness and wing structure that supported most of the weight of the flyer would be developed. Human muscles being used mostly for propulsion and aerobatics.

I don't know. Why don't you try mixing sulphur-hexafluoride and pure oxygen together, and tell us what you get?

See? If you dense the air into a thich, water-like substance, you may naturally float.

What then of our duck? what will the geese quack?

Excellent point! If you want to feel like a bird, go jump in the nearest lake. Just remember to hold your breath.

Miracles never cease with you, huh?

I live in my own, odd, little world.

Depends on the method of flying.

Consider the indoor gymnastic event where the (usually male) performer does body turns while suspended above the floor by cables and gripping two rings with the hands. The individual extends his arms as part of the demonstration so that they are fully stretched horizontally and remains motionless above the floor (usually with both feet pointing vertically downward and a limited amount of body shudder) while muscle groups drift into alarm with the pain of supporting the body in this position. This posture is similar to that used by birds while gliding, seemingly effortlessly. So a human is not inherently suitable for flapping-wings flight in comparison, on the basis of strength, weight and the wing area needed to support it.

Now, attach a small engine and a fixed wing structure, like a micro-light, and that's a different story.

...Now, attach a small engine and a fixed wing structure, like a micro-light, and that's a different story...

Right, the whole idea of gliding is to use gravity-pull as an engine.

Just in case no one has stooped this low yet... Conversely, why can't a fly human?

Dear all,

There is been a lot of misunderstanding!!! Well, I if u see the question I asked

is it possible for a human to fly with big spanned artificial wings.

if Dinosaurs with still heavier body mass could fly then why can't a human fly with wings of proportionate size & span?

Well some people think they are too smart to answer this. In that case, YOUR COMMENTS ARE NOT WELCOME!

I clearly mentioned Artificial Wings. It's not about why a human can't fly naturally or how a human flies with Hang glider? This discussion seems to be going in different direction.

I know a human can't fly naturally. Still the inputs were interesting.

There was some comment added by some Guest, which somehow meant that evolution doesn't involve transformation but some sudden changes like Parents couldn't fly but there suddenly starts flying. Well, everybody thought it's stupid. Even I think so. But there is a little scope.

I have actually seen an incident where a woman gave birth to a child who was a monkey. The child died after few hours. What I believe is, the evolution is mostly by accidents. Mothers do influence the characteristics of a child. But, who would want a child like monkey.

The same way, accidentally a walking animal someday gave birth to a baby with wings which can only flap, then in next generation accidentally a baby born with hollow bones but still it couldn't fly & then again after some generation a baby was born with high metabolism. And then it made it's first attempt to fly.

But there is also a possibility that a baby might born with all these abilities in just the next generation. A biggest accident!

What if we could understand the mechanism of these accidents & create a flying human.

O.k, You're talking about transition jumps in evolution, asking something to the effect of "Is there a mechanism to prevent a sudden mutation which will include hollow bones, enhanced cardio-vascular system, high power to weight ratio in muscle constitution, a high-friction surface area, and incredibly high heart pulse-rate to support large quantities of oxygenation into the cell-system coupled with incredibly highly adapted metabolism rate, all in one single mutation, not unlike this woman who gave birth to a monkey?

Is this the question? Just about? What do you think are the chances?

Just to make a point: When I was an infant, my mom took me with her to the market, and there, met a neighbours. They paused to chat and the neighbors asked her to follow them to an art gallery near by. My mom asked: to the art gallery with the baby? and the husband replied: yes, we'll buy you coffee, and give your ape a banana. Now, I'm no movie star, and no gorilla too, but ape, I am.

Uhhh, can I get a copy of that video for the next bachelor party I have to plan...

Whoops! There I go again. Engineers are a curious group. They tend to be creative, and sometimes that creativity goes astray.

Anyway, haven't you seen those silent movies of the guy flapping cardboard wings down a sand dune, then off a bridge? That should answer your question. Humans do not have the strength needed for flight. Sure, we can glide and land with parachutes, but we are very heavy and we don't have the natural horsepower to fly. What is so hard to get?! We did not come down an evolutionary path that adapted our bodies to include flight as one of our abilities. Instead we went down the "Brain" path, and being here, we've figured out a number of remarkable ways to fly. As well as the brain-power to look at ourselves for what we really are, and not go diving off the nearest cliff. But, don't let me stop you.

One more thing, flight has been around for an awfully long time. Has anyone mentioned the pterodactyls and pterodons? I believe their fossil remains betray why such large creatures could fly. As for today, your size limit hovers somewhere around the California and Chilean condors.

Perhaps it's because we don't eat enough carrion. You first.

But hey, we've got the brain-power to design and build the Harrier, so, basically, in evolutionary terms, we fly!

And the question was?...

Why is it that only we can ask how dolphins evolved in water, and dolphins cannot write poetry?

Put in another way: How do we know that dolphins evolved in water? Vermin, do you have a striking positive proof that dolphins evolved in water?

Maybe they popped out of my car's trunk, only later chose to live in water, given the traits they already have?

Vermin! can you prove it otherwise? huh?

Prove it!

It's been a standing theory derived from the fossil record and the actual anatomy of dolphins and whales that at one time they were related to the bovine order of early mammals and reentered the water. Other than that, I can not offer more.

On the other hand, who says that dolphins don't write poetry?! I would think that any species so dependant on sound would have already far surpassed any humanoid, land-locked bard.

Hah!

How do we know the next galaxy, is not some hole in the sky?

Can you prove it's not? Atoms? have you seen an atom? Hah! you were told there are atoms!

And the moon, how do we know it's a sphere? did anyone prove it's not a half-sphere?

Waitaminute.... Can you prove the earth is a sphere?.... all I see is some flat ground, and I've been around!, believe that! Yes, you can see some curvature from the jet's window, But, can you prove it's not an optical illusion?

Besides, Can you positively prove the earth is not carried by a giant turtle?

Just be honest here for a moment, can you prove it? Then Prove it! prove hell will not freeze over!

I can prove that you're a butt-munch that's on some kind of holy crusade tonight! Who put a quarter in you, me amigo?!

zero-point-energy!

Flippers great great grandfather was a cow?

That would make for an epic poem in clicks and whistles.

milo

dear pc,

Sorry for my early "crazy" answer before, but here goes:

"...an incident where a woman gave birth to a child who was a monkey..."

You are basically right in your notion that mutations are occurring by chance.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

"...The child died after few hours. What I believe is, the evolution is mostly by accidents..."

You are basically right in your notion that once a mutation occurred by chance, it's morphology may influence survival

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

"...a walking animal someday gave birth to a baby with wings which can only flap, then in next generation accidentally a baby born with hollow bones but still it couldn't fly & then again after some generation a baby was born with high metabolism. And then it made it's first attempt to fly..."

Accumulating succession of survival helping traits, may indeed amount to something like the ability of flight, with evolution lines shorter than birds, bats given as example, but such a succession, must have a very long time with a narrow selection pressure (e.g, only flapping individuals able to survive and procreate), given probability laws.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

But not likely in one, freak-accident mutation.

It's like saying what if I won the lottery now, right now!

- Have you?

Not likely.

It takes a lot of chance, in a very long and accumulating succession.

That's why it's called evolution.

There was quite a good story about this on NPR this morning.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10108206

Apparently the major differences between species are less a matter of genes than a matter of how and when those genes are expressed. So it is likely that major changes (i.e., feet to fins or arms to wings) occur with changes in a few controlling genes, not in an unlikely incremental rewriting of thousands of genes over millions of years.

Our understanding of genetics is too limited at this point to "prove" or "disprove" how who did what. It makes sense to me, though, to assume that the things we observe in the natural record actually happened naturally.

I put this out as food for thought at this intellectual pot-luck...

One of the hardest things for people to get their minds around is how does a handful of undifferentiated cells suddenly start forming a human, a Yuval, or a Kris (). Interestingly enough scientists have known how this process works for some time now. This is the work of "homeobox" genes on DNA in one of the chromosomes. These genes turn on and off chemicals that cause differentiation. For example, one of the first homeobox genes to express itself is the one that causes a differentiation between anterior and posterior (Of course, with Yuval and Kris, the process is somewhat confused).

If you hold your hand up and look at your fingers, your fingers are shaped the way they are by another homeobox gene chemical... Where the chemical is the least concentrated, you get a little finger and where the chemical concentration is the higest, you get a thumb. So, if you're all thumbs, that's the fault of homeobox gene expression.

The first question that comes to mind (at least I think so), would be "OK, but how do these genes know to turn these chemicals on in the right pattern and in the right place to get, say, a human hand?! The answer is the genes are mapped out on the DNA and chromosome in a pattern that reflects your geometry. Literally, the genes form a "sort of" holograph, that when expressed in the proper sequence, gives rise to hearts, hands, feet, noses, you name it. Well, as I said... "For what it's worth."

This is not unlike what I've heard: Some control genes act on rough tissue morphology, the rest done by other control genes enabling a few types of symmetry in the eventual structure. So a complete shape is done with fewer genes that an immensely dense an complicated set of instructions.

A likely analogy to this, would be the difference between a raw-data picture, done by say, some bit-map, as opposed to a picture created by a script of routine-made structures, like vector-graphics.

This mechanism is evident in some birth deformities such as "rabbit-lips", "joined fingers" to name a few.

If we look at your avatar for instance, we can see a very simple structure-set coupled with a strong O-type symmetry influence.

Yes, but I'm very complex on the inside.

"...very complex on the inside..."

This, I could never doubt.

Did you happen to know that the DNA sequence of an Amoeba is more than twice the length, that of a human?

No punt given or intended.

Nevermind that. You're still my hero.

Seriously now: in DNA, size rarely matters:

Source: "Introduction to Bio-Informatics", lecture 2

Well, that makes us look pretty simple... However, a lot of DNA that appears in organisms is "junk DNA." So, let's say your great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, grandfather, who was something like an opossum, got a virus, which managed to paste its sequence into your grandfather's DNA. Just a fragment that does nothing really.

Also, I would suspect that this happens more frequently with simpler life forms.

Yup. A crazy as it may sound, it is possible.

Also, I'm with Monty Python on this one... Why can't a Scotsman play tennis?

Ssshhhhhh! Don't tell anyone I asked this? I might get excommunicated from reality.

"...excommunicated from reality..."

By all means go ahead, everyone's asleep now anyway.

Write, and erase. There is such a pencil you know. it's called "mail-me and we'll immediately forget it ever happened"

- what ever happened?

see>? it works.

This is absolute proof that editing is of a higher order than writing.

milo

would it be possible to manipulate the genes of an organism so that it would obtain these traits? like if the virus infecting the organism would then paste it's sequence containing the avian DNA onto the organism's DNA?

Yes, that is very possible, but you will wind up with either a large flightless bird or a man that looks like a pterodactyl.

But, it may be possible. You never know!!!!

The theory of human flight is very simple. You must throw yourself to the earth and MISS.

what a refreshing approach

Yes, and it works. But only if you have enough forward velocity (about 17,000 MPH)!

Thank you, Douglas Adams... Where ever you are.

Thank Douglas Adams? The whale and the flowerpot went SPLAT!

It was in his later books.

Ah.

(Btw, have you noticed lately having to post the same message twice before it shows up? This is getting annoying.)

No, I haven't. But I have noticed that sometimes when I hit the "Preview Comment" button, it takes a really long time for anything to happen.

Strange. I'm using a fairly common browser - Mozilla Firefox - and so I'd suspect others might also have this problem and report on it were it due to the browser. This is also a recent behavior that I've not seen before. Wonder if it might have something to do with the fact that I now write most of my posts from a Macintosh? Just grasping at straws here. I'd try posting from a WinDoze machine, but I recently wiped everything Microsoft from my other box and now run 100% Linux (Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 Workstation). The mystery deepens.

Thanks all the same.

If I remember correctly, Internet Explorer runs a slightly more advanced version of JAVA and XML, and I think .NET was also involved somehow. Netscape and Mozilla were scheduled to upgrade in the recent future.

Any one want to dive in here and help me with this?

...scheduled to upgrade in the recent future...

Recent Future, is the likely term to describe the proper mental approach to the wonderful and recent invention of time-machines, to appear in the future. The recent future.

More specifically to example this, MS proven for years, that the future is safe and sound in it's distant past.

And Mozilla, a collection of remnants from Netscape, which recently revived to arise in the future, to compete with Mozilla in the future, recent future, shared market of the three.

None so far, able to prevent browser hijacks, by interested dubious parties.

OK, OK, OK... The "near" future.

It's interesting that while most seem to hate IE and MS in general, they still make the world go round. The only people I know running Netscape and/or Mozilla are UNIX and LINUX people.

"Hey! I just got a new video card!"

"Cool! plug it in!"

"It's not doing anything?"

"That's OK, we'll just write a driver for it."

"Yeah!"

Well, I was just teasing you, as you do me (hey! the innocent way!)

And you are absolutely right in that Mozilla are the type of future-munching bunch needed, exactly where the giant is zzzzzzzooing his way to immortality.

I have a VAIO desktop that I'm not using. So I was considering loading it with LINUX. Then, I remembered days of using UNIX and how everything had to be hacked. Nothing was simple. It was at that point that I realized it would probably become more of a boat anchor than it is now.

No offense, but most of the UNIX/LINUX people I know are like hi-fi addicts: messing with the system becomes the end-goal. I just want to do stuff.

Even if you get Red-Hat or other "mature" versions, you'd have to tinker with it all day long because it's open-source, and every time someone comes with a new cool patch, it will mess a million other carefully balanced pony-tricks in the system.

That's the innate nature of debugging a complicated system.

If a serious company, like Sun, or NEC, or even a giant like IBM were to take Linux as a public domain baby, at least for it's PR and "fatherly" reputation, they can do wonders with it.

This way, every kid with a good idea, overlooks other aspects of the system when writing their patch, fixing some bugs, while creating others in the process.

This way, every kid with a good idea, overlooks other aspects of the system when writing their patch, fixing some bugs, while creating others in the process.

This way , every poster with a good idea, overlooks other aspects of the thread when writing their post , fixing some questions, while creating others in the process.

Hey , I need a coffee I think.

You're so cool, it's embarrassing

Devious ! You know perfectly well that neither of us blushes.

"Man is the only creature that blushes , or has to".

And to to slow my KiloGuru progress and swat another post -STOP NICKING MY LINKS -it's plagiarism. Now I've got to find my link you were jabbering on about. My mornings plan is seriously jiggered. Gits. My brother just phoned saying he was take to hospital and I told him to call later (honest !)

"...STOP NICKING MY LINKS..."

Flattery is the sincerest form of copying, you know.

Besides, WTF?

"...Now I've got to find my link you were jabbering on about..."

This is probably it. Why don't you ask me what your links are ?

It only makes sense that way. Some weird, sick, warped, fury sense.

You can still have the picture I just went to find from my monkey book.

Proverb:

"An ape's an ape,

An a varlet's a varlet,

Though they be clad in silk or scarlet"

Grahame:

Monkeys....very sensibly refrain from speech, lest they should be set to earn their livings.

"...lest they should be set to earn their livings..."

Some, make their living, monkeying around

How alike we are ! I will consult the monkey book for another tit-bit since I can't reach to tickle your fluffy little cheeks.

I'm using Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 Workstation and don't have to tinker with it at all. Patches and upgrades are a breeze using Yum, and far easier than with any WinHosed system I've ever used.

e

What's "yum"?

What do you use for peripherial's driver, when external hardware attached? (or, is it the same question, really?):

What's "yum"?

YUM is an ACRONYM^*: Yellowdog Updater Modified. Makes updating/upgrading your Linux installations a snap.

-e

* ACRONYM: Alphabetic Co-location for Reducing Or Numbing Your Memory. (Courtesy of The Devil's D.P. Dictionary, ©1981, Stan Kelly-Bootle)

But what software do you run on it? Office stuff, productivity stuff, game stuff, whatever stuff?

Hey Vermin. I'm running Linux on my VAIO laptop, an FS780/W. No problems whatsoever.

Go find cnpowers post . No , I'm not giving you lazy coffee-slurpers any nice easy hints. I'm sure it says somewhere on CR4 to look before you leap (or words to that effect). You really should know by now that I peep around a fair bit vermin ! My mouth and eye can function together (most of the time ).

I notice a curious turn of phrase higher up - hmm , I shall have to investigate further. Have you been secretly steering events perhaps ? I'm more paranoid than Yuval you know . Curiosity did not kill the cat , being complacent with those nine lives did.

It's Saturday , and I'm feeling more cryptic than my normal craptic self . Plumbing the depths is my speciality. Since I'm in rambling mode with an hour to kill - Did you ever hear that explanation of walls in Japanese houses , if people can see in through an opaque wall , they can also be seen from the inside. This is like the goings on elsewhere , in which stuff gets hidden in a deluge of other stuff.

<you can turn off now folks , I'm in self answering mode >

There is loads to do today , and I have to juggle my balls carefully

Sh** It's already gone 8

That old cloak is going to have to get dusted off soon.

ramble , ramble....

<OK everyone , he's re-booting soon>

Now , as I was sa.......

What are you talking about now?! Yes, very cryptic.

As far as the URL is concerned, I think this ranks up there with the "Great Spaghetti Hoax" of the fifties. Had your countrymen phoning in asking where they could get spaghetti seeds.

The spaghetti trees was a classic. Loads of people fell for it completely - they showed forlorn looking Italians gathering the few strand that remained on trees after the devastating crop failure ! ROFLMAO . The timing was perfect given the lack of peoples knowledge about the world outside of England.

btw - yabbering on like a flip-top dustbin on speed is my greatest skill. I make very little sense to anyone. And I'm pleased about it. It saves people wasting time figuring how mad I am - they can just cut to the OMG he's beyond salvage.

"...dive in here and help me with this..."

Keeping both mozilla and IE doesn't hurt, but I've heard it may sometimes lead to the unexpected.

I tried Mozilla for about a year, and was quite happy, but Hebrew fonts and scripts, forced me back to IE.

I now run IE 6.0, exclusively, and experience no particular problems. I'm not crazy about it, but at least, the browsing is predictable.

I'm all about predictability in computer work. Otherwise - fuck it, not for me.

Whats your opinion of IE7 ? I run it with firefox as well.

I never tried it - loyal to the hebrew saying "If it's there and working - Why fix it?"

I've been running it since it came out. It seems to work very well. I don't get any problems that I can think of.

How much heavier than IE6 is it, in terms of response-time?

It works fine for me now , but it was a bitch when I first used it last year. I keep meaning to try Firefox more , but click IE by habit.

Mozilla has excellent mail application, called Thunderbird

About 50 years ago i made myself a hang glider and threw myself to the ground and missed. I can tell you out of painful experience a human cannot fly.

So what? a fly cannot human either.

This isn't what you want , I know , but don't get in a flap.

There is a qoute : "Bugger Bognar"

I can't remember what this is , until I'm out of editor !

You need to go to the Red Bull web page...

Not fair - the man in pink was well on-topic. You're aerodynamically unqualified to be here fluff ball - I've found cuter things in my belly button !

Why is it when I open # 103, I see only those messages that you, Yuval, and I have posted?

I didn't understand the question:

When you press #103 on the top-right corner of the post?

If so, it's to isolate the post, from the thread.

No. In the list of current postings. But as soon as you mark them as all-read, they go away. So there goes the evidence!

I cannot tell. I don't know. What is your current browser?

I'm not sure all browser versions or makes, show web-pages in the same manner

How similar are these

to the native Peruvian condor-dancers

I think the gold, thigh-high boots answer that question.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHYXrqoS08o milo

But why cant we fly with out wings