Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Chamber pressure changes with altitude
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Pdvdh" data-source="post: 1221367" data-attributes="member: 4191"><p>The additional emphasis concerning powder load density just undermined the notion of the existence of empirical scientific collection of evidence supporting the myth that altitude, in and of itself, affects MV. We now have another possible factor - powder load density of the cartridges. Which implies even another possible cause - specific brands, specific powder identity within brands, and even lot numbers within the identical powder selected and used. </p><p></p><p>If altitude, in and of itself, affected MV, wouldn't one expect to measure that affect on MV with cartridges regardless of powder load densities?</p><p></p><p>The observation being observed and expressed has now turned to a suspicion that different powder load densities <u>combined</u> with differing altitude, affects MV. Which would suggest unstable powder load density much more than altitude as the cause and affect. </p><p></p><p>With a hop, skip, and a jump, the possible combination of contributing factors approach infinity, and become indistinguishable from one another. Unless altitude alone has an overwhelming affect on MV, which causes MV to rise clearly above all the extraneous combinations of possible causes that combine to create a lot of meaningless background noise and variation in MV, the empirical data collection process becomes an effort in futility. </p><p></p><p>I'm unaware of any scientifically sound hypotheses suggesting how altitude could affect MV, and I can't think of a single one on my own, but I'm all for the effort provided it's on others' dime and time. If a person can concoct the perfect mixture of a large enough number of variables and influencing factors, we know we can cure cancer. Which is the inverse of stating, if the empirical scientific collection of data isn't carefully designed and controlled, the data measured and collected will be meaningless.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Pdvdh, post: 1221367, member: 4191"] The additional emphasis concerning powder load density just undermined the notion of the existence of empirical scientific collection of evidence supporting the myth that altitude, in and of itself, affects MV. We now have another possible factor - powder load density of the cartridges. Which implies even another possible cause - specific brands, specific powder identity within brands, and even lot numbers within the identical powder selected and used. If altitude, in and of itself, affected MV, wouldn't one expect to measure that affect on MV with cartridges regardless of powder load densities? The observation being observed and expressed has now turned to a suspicion that different powder load densities [U]combined[/U] with differing altitude, affects MV. Which would suggest unstable powder load density much more than altitude as the cause and affect. With a hop, skip, and a jump, the possible combination of contributing factors approach infinity, and become indistinguishable from one another. Unless altitude alone has an overwhelming affect on MV, which causes MV to rise clearly above all the extraneous combinations of possible causes that combine to create a lot of meaningless background noise and variation in MV, the empirical data collection process becomes an effort in futility. I'm unaware of any scientifically sound hypotheses suggesting how altitude could affect MV, and I can't think of a single one on my own, but I'm all for the effort provided it's on others' dime and time. If a person can concoct the perfect mixture of a large enough number of variables and influencing factors, we know we can cure cancer. Which is the inverse of stating, if the empirical scientific collection of data isn't carefully designed and controlled, the data measured and collected will be meaningless. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Chamber pressure changes with altitude
Top