If you have taken physics or you are science-oriented, you'll realize that this is very likely a sham. I'm not 100% certain, but if you think about the physics, what is being suggested is impossible.
Think about the enormous amount of energy required to keep this car afloat if it's based on propellant. Consider how Harrier Jump jets spend so much fuel to do something similar for a few seconds.
The only way to accomplish this practically would be to rely on a technology that counteracts gravitational forces without expending energy. The aliens that have been spotted sporadically likely use such a technology. But we are nowhere near that level of technology yet. [Edit - deleted: Our scientists still don't know where gravity comes from.]
100%. I am confident that the car that did a 0-60 test is not the same car that flew. That car I’m certain was just a shell with thrusters - A tiny motor and a tiny battery. It is all smoke and mirrors.
But even if it is 100% real, we will never see a single car on the road do any of this. The only thing you might see is the thrust 0-60 on a track. And if we see that, you will only see it once or twice a day. It would take way too much time and electrons to pressurize the car to consistently do this during a full lap on a track. Back to physics…it just isn’t practical.
The show was cute but not grounded in anything real.
With all this said, he tricked us in 2017 about the roadster. Odds are, he is just tricking us again. Plus, the new car does not look nearly as good as the 2017 roadster.
As fun as this was to watch, it is all meh. I guarantee that the Mission S will be a far superior driver’s car.
I am confident that the car that did a 0-60 test is not the same car that flew. That car I’m certain was just a shell with thrusters - A tiny motor and a tiny battery. It is all smoke and mirrors.
If what you said above is true, I think it's outright fraud. I don't know if there is a law against this type of fraud. It's kinda' similar to how game shows were once rigged but are now illegal. It gives a false impression that deceives the public. Nobody directly gets hurt but I think it does long-term damage as people start believing in nonsense. In this case, people would invest in Tesla stock based on the false assumptions.
With all this said, he tricked us in 2017 about the roadster.
If what you said is true, I'm wondering why the SEC didn't get involved as it would affect investors' belief about the company.
63
u/WritersChopBlock 5h ago edited 4h ago
CONSIDER THE SCIENCE BEHIND THIS.
If you have taken physics or you are science-oriented, you'll realize that this is very likely a sham. I'm not 100% certain, but if you think about the physics, what is being suggested is impossible.
Think about the enormous amount of energy required to keep this car afloat if it's based on propellant. Consider how Harrier Jump jets spend so much fuel to do something similar for a few seconds.
The only way to accomplish this practically would be to rely on a technology that counteracts gravitational forces without expending energy. The aliens that have been spotted sporadically likely use such a technology. But we are nowhere near that level of technology yet. [Edit - deleted: Our scientists still don't know where gravity comes from.]