Submitted by Royal_Bumblebee_ t3_ydslck in todayilearned
Just to help you OP, the "dungheap" thing is completely mythological made up thing. There was no dung under the Prague castle in the 17th century. What happened was that their very "fluffy" style of clothing slowed their fall on a ground, that wasnt 90 degrees against the window, but slightly inclined, which again slowed the impact.
fluffy clothing would have negligible impact to slow their acceleration; a 70 foot drop isn't big enough to reach speeds close to their terminal velocity that the friction would be a major player (although it would lower their final terminal velocity) - a person reaches terminal velocity after about 1500 feet.
They landed both with something that was softer than stone and also at an incline. Their political opponents claimed it was a dungheap, but it certainly could have been something more benign; lots of layers of fluffy clothes would help with the landing a bit.
At least one of them had severe injuries, though.
There is too much of a incline (I dont know if thats the proper word). Modern examination proved that they was nothing that could potentially stay in the specific place and slow their fall. Professor Josef Petráň and professor Josef Tesař and others proved that the only thing that had any influence on the slowing of the impact had to be either their clothes or simply the "terrain situation" at the place. If you can read Czech I could provide you with some direct quotes from their research.
​
Also not sure where did 70 feet drop come from. The Czech researchers worked with 50 feet, which is the height of the window from which Slavata, Martinic and Fabricius were thrown from.
At 50 feet, the clothes have even less of an impact on slowing their descent - the friction from the air increases as the speed increases, and they aren't going fast enough after just 50 feet.
But as I did say, the clothes and the incline would help dissipate the force of the impact. So clothes can make a difference (so if you meant slowed the forces on them at impact, then yes, we are in agreement)
Sure, english isnt my first or second language, so we probably do. Still, the main point is that the paper/dung/trash heap Story Is just innacurate.
This has been fascinating. Thanks for your contributions.
Source? That sounds more fantastical than the dungheap story which was accepted without question by the academic sources I've read.
If you read Czech I can recommend you something. My history teacher at university was one of the historians who went against the dungheep/trashheep story and spent a lot of time going through primary sources to dispute that.
I thought the dungheap was the counter-explanation for why they survived being tossed out the window. One side basically said “wow, these people were tossed out the window and didn’t die, God must have protected them.” Then the other side was like “wasn’t God, they landed in poop.”
Yes. And it was inclined area under the window+ the baggy/fluffy clothes. Both sides tried propaganda.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments