airplane vs conveyor belt

Hey lurch - let's say you have a wheel weighing half a ton, with frictionless bearings. In fact, let's say you have eight of them. How much force does it take to rotate that wheel at an extremely high rate of acceleration?

Your just trying to trick me into posting again
You need to know what that high rate of acceleration is in order to calculate the force (F=m x a). And to apply it to the example of our plane, calculate from that the linear force applied to the axle (dimensions of the tire required) so you could figure out how much acceleration would be required in order to hold the thrust from plane back.
If you already know the force you are fighting against (linear force on the axles produce by thrust from the engines ) you can calculate the required rate of acceleration (still need the dimensions of the tires).

Could that force (in theory) be applied by a conveyor belt, with, perhaps, a balancing thrust (from, let's say, a jet engine) to keep the whole system from moving backward?

The short answer is yes. First I am no engineer, but in the same way that a plane would normally apply a linear force forward through the spindles to the wheels as it accelerates on a normal runway, the wheels and tires have a tendancy to push the plane back if the wheel was ACCELERATED. Without accleration however, (ie:get the treadmill running at a constant 1 0000000000 mph) you would be able to hold the plane from moving with your hand since there would no longer be any force on the axle when the wheels are spining at a constant speed objects in motion tend to stay in motion, objects at rest tend to stay at rest). The hand theory doesnt take into account the friction between the tire and the belt surface which at 1 0000000000 mph on a normal tire would create a significant force to want the tire to slow down but if the tire is able to handle that speed, it would have to be super ultra mega heat resistant or have a low enough co-efficient of friction to stop the energy loss into heat. If it can spin at that speed with so little energy loss that it wont get warm, you would be able to hold the plane back with your finger, never mind needing a jet engine.

I admit I interpreted (still do) the "fuzzy" part of the question (speed of the conveyer matching the speed of the wheels part) as "if the wheels are rotating at an rpm equal to 60mph, then the belt is going 60mph in the opposite direction". Interpret it that way, and the plane will fly.
It took me this long to finally see what the other half was seeing- "the conveyor belt moves at a rate that if you had a gps in the plane, it would show no movement of the plane (wheels spinning insanely fast but staying stationary to the earth). That would require the belt to infinately accelerate to be able to hold the wheels in the same geographic location.

GW, quit stirring the pot.

If this thread still exists in a couple years, I will search out my previous post that showed the ROUGH math for the plane will fly interpretation, and I will do the math to show the rate of acceleration of the belt that is required to hold the plane back for the it wont fly interpretation. It will be using 1lb thrust and 1lb tires and zero friction bearings/tires since I dont think there is a calculator with enough characters to use real plane figures.

BEFORE ANYONE TRIES TO ARGUE FURTHER THAT IT WILL OR WONT FLY, READ THIS POST AND UNDERSTAND WHAT I AM TRYING TO GET ACROSS.
THE FU@#ING QUESTION IS TOO FU@#ING VAGUE TO GIVE A RIGHT ANSWER. LET THIS FU@#ING THREAD DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE

If you post up after this post and try and argue either point wrong, you are either ignorant or a shit disturber.
Did I mention letting this thread die.