A concept most important to sailing and hydrofoiling isn't as simple to explain as you might think. Most of the simplistic explanations you learned are incomplete and scientists are still struggling to come to a consensus.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/no-one-can-explain-why-planes-stay-in-the-air/
I imagine a couple of members here will enjoy discussing this. 
—
For regular flying, think happy thoughts. Helicopters are believed to maintain flight by beating the air into submission.
Also, for regular flying there's this. Helicopters also vibrate so bad the Earth rejects them.
Bill Herderich
Oh man. I may have missed it in the reading, but it seems there ought be some aspect and discussion of the air’s ACCELERATION over a foil’s topside that would help account and explain for some portion of the pressure drops on the top. I.e. 1) the angle of attack, alone, can and does create a relative vacuum somewhere on the top (and somewhat “back”) side of a foil, even if inverted, even if flat on both sides. And then 2) that relative vacuum, perhaps, in addition to contributing to a pressure differential on its own, also demands an acceleration of the air particles to fill it. And, significantly (!?) as those particles accelerate (get “sucked in”) to fill it, they do so in a manner that is relative to their proximity to that vacuum, thereby getting spread further apart from each other in the process...thereby becoming “less dense” ( and exerting less pressure) even at those points as well. Kind of like when cars come OUT of a traffic jam...the density of cars is reduced as each car gets “freed” and accelerates at staggered times, and not in one uniformly spaced collection. Heck. What do I know. I don’t even know if I know enough to feel confused. Newton blows on the bottom, while Bernoulli (or one of his not yet fully articulated but close relatives) sucks from the top, and voila! We sail, fly, and foil. But Blah blah blah. I’m sure my rough postulations have been well covered (refuted, confirmed, clarified) somewhere already. But my reading of the article, and contemplations about it and lift, may well have advanced my personal understanding, even if still pleasantly naive. Guess I’ll just hope no one was bored enough to read all this (my post, that is)
And thanks for posting, webguy!!
After studying the Horue stabilizer. I now know some of the reasons Webguy swam so much his first year.
It was okay when I finally had it set to the proper angle of attack which took a while. So many people back then had the conception that a flat stab meant you were faster thus a good thing. My board was a much bigger issue.
Pretty sure F=ma and Bernoullism are both at work. Stick a sheet of plywood out of a car window at highway speed and you'll get a lot of lift even at a stalled angle of attack. There is obviously less pressure on the lee side of a sail as we can plainly see by Taty Frans' expression below. Q.E.D.
arrogantj
'twas kind of a surprise to understand the distinction between a fin stalling at a high angle of attack vs one cavitating where water boils on the low pressure side.
http://mauiultrafins.com/technology-2/fin-secrets/
Sweet mother of pearl. Chris just won the internet today. Everyone turn off their computers and devices and go home. Game over.
--- The Arrogant Jerk: Crabby and irritable since 1998.
It's not that complicated - this flys:
Ah, but why does it fly?
It's a simple toy but a the same time so complex that even the steam locomotive, Babbage's Difference Calculator and Maxwell's equations proceeded it.
http://www.rubber-power.com/history-of-aviation-rubber-power.htm
Why? Because of these two - this is the most awesome book / story / reality:
https://www.amazon.com/Wright-Brothers-David-McCullough/dp/1476728747/
aerodynamics of an owl
Cool video clip: https://static-movie-usa.glencoesoftware.com/webm/10.1242/399/8284d850fd900a56ee64a7c20889aea55a0fe99b/JEB214809.MovieS1.webm
source: https://jeb.biologists.org/content/223/3/jeb214809
very cool. (and I see the owl doesn't subscribe to the "winglet" approach)
Good discussion about lift. Starts very simple and becomes increasingly complex. If you are bored at the beginning, don't worry, she gets to Navier-Stokes by the mid-point.
27:20: "Calculating lift is difficult. We really don't know how to do it properly." Ph.D. lecturer at MIT
20 more minutes down the rabbit hole.
Note*
The computing time even with a fast computer