Jump to content

I have the Sherlock fake suicide worked out...oh yes


Recommended Posts

Well its Ms Reggie and myself got it.

Moffat hinted thus:True devotees will spot them (clues). THROUGH THEIR TEARS!!!


What does Sherlock do that he never does....cry.

Why does he cry...to create tears.

You can see his tears fall...thus helping those down below to move the soft landing into place directly below him.


Got it!

Ah well a gust of wind would also affect his fall which is the part of the reason for the teardrop, to make allowances for wind.

In a roundabout way Sherlock admits to the 'fake' tears with his speech to Watson on being a fake.


He also needs to have Watson stand far away so that the gunman cannot see Watson and the prepared landing at the same time.

Throwing his mobile down sends the message 'Im jumping now'(he doesn't want it in his pocket when he lands).

Exactly! And with wind-shift surely...

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT64bvZTta0cZAwnBcrlt7VjloO4sbwGF6F0tHTj6JEJMWIcAHNIg + http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRevJMOgBclkCzIpoykCNV1Ku05MY3g65QaZ227z-RUt49h63PDpw > http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/01/17/article-2087814-0F8035B200000578-692_634x396.jpg



OR



A spherical teardrop of mass m, radius r, vertical velocity v (positive downward), and

mass density ρd ≈ 1 g cm−3 satisfies

m =

4

3

πρdr3 (1)

dm

dt = πρmr2|v| (2)

m

dv

dt = mg −

C

2

πρar2v|v| − v

dm

dt

(3)

where the terms on the right-hand side of equation (3) give the weight, air drag, and mist drag

acting on the growing drop.

When the air drag is written as above, the drag coefficient C = C® is a function only of

the Reynolds number [6, 7] R = 2r|v|/ν, where ν is the kinematic viscosity of air. Figure 1

shows C® measured for falling liquid drops (data points, [8]), together with the small-R

theoretical Stokes result C = 24/R (broken line, [6]) and a new empirical result (full line),

C = 12R−1/2 (4)

valid over the intermediate range 10 < R < 1000. Such simple algebraic results allow us

to avoid complicated numerical results for C® obtained from the nonlinear Navier?Stokes

equations [7]. Inserting equation (4) into equation (3) and setting dm/dt = dv/dt = 0 yields

the mist-free terminal or ?settling? speed of drops of radius r with 10 < R < 1000:

v0 = σr (5)

There's a great post here with a bunch of interesting theories, but have a look at the screenshot at the very bottom. The figure on the stretcher looks pretty clearly like Mycroft, not Sherlock...


http://bloodredorion.tumblr.com/post/16159755295/how-did-sherlock-survive

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I have had multiple jobs completed at my home by T.D. PLUMBFIX SOLUTIONS LTD, and I wouldn't go to anyone else now. They always come at the agreed day/time, I have never been asked to rearrange. The jobs have always been completed to extremely high standards, and as a perfectionist myself, I appreciate this level of care and detail. I'm grateful of the clear up afterward too, leaving me very little to do after the job is done. I am always blown away by the speed and efficiency  - no waffle, no flannel, just sheer hard work from start to finish. In summary - a highly professional first class service. Don't hesitate to call T.D. PLUMBFIX SOLUTIONS LTD, if you like excellence and trade people that will respect your home. 
    • Or increase tax.  The freezing of personal allowances is one way, not what I would choose.  On principle I don't care if the rich immigrate.  The main parties could have been more honest before the election.  Reform is deluded.
    • I edited my post because I couldn't be sure we were talking about politicians and I couldn't be bothered to read it all back. But it was off the back of a thread discussing labour councillors, so it went without saying really and I should have left it.  What I said was 'There's something very aggressive about language like that - it's not big and it's not clever. Some of the angry energy that comes from the far left is pretty self-defeating.' (In relation to a labour councillor rather immaturely, in my view, wearing a jumper that read 'fuck the Tories').  But I don't recall saying that "violent rhetoric" is exclusively the domain of the left wing. So I do think you're taking a bit of a bit of leap here. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...