Easy question -- Kinematics

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

johndoe3344

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2009
Messages
432
Reaction score
6
Let's neglect air resistance. If I take an object and throw it straight upward at some initial velocity Vo, is it correct to say that the time for it to come back to my hand is equal to 2*(the time it takes for it to drop down from its maximum height)?

Members don't see this ad.
 
Then suppose I threw the ball on earth upwards and timed how long it would take for it to return back to my hand. I then did the same experiment on the moon, where, say, g_moon=1/2g.

How much longer would the time be for the moon experiment? In other words, is t inversely proportional to g, or to sqrt(g)?
 
Then suppose I threw the ball on earth upwards and timed how long it would take for it to return back to my hand. I then did the same experiment on the moon, where, say, g_moon=1/2g.

How much longer would the time be for the moon experiment? In other words, is t inversely proportional to g, or to sqrt(g)?

Given a =v/t , t= v/a where a is g for earth,
Given acc for moon = 0.5g then time on moon is twice that on earth..
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Here's how I would do it:
Let's disregard the first part of the projectile (from the time when you throw it up until it reaches its maximum height).

Let's just look at the second half of the projectile- the point where it reaches its maximum height until it lands in your hands again.
Using the equation y = v(initial)t + 1/2 a t^2: when it's at its maximum height, its vertical acceleration is 0, so v(initial) = 0
So the above equation becomes: y = 0 + 1/2 at^2.
From that equation, we know that t ~ square root (1/a) , in other words, t is inversely proportional to the sqrt(a) (just like what you had said, sorry-i had to work it through).

Okay, so using
t~1/ sqrt a:we know that a(earth) = 2*a(moon).
---> time for earth = t~ 1/sqrt a
--> time for moon = t' ~ 1/ sqrt (1/.5a) --> because the acceleration on the moon is half that of earth
finally, t' = 1/ sqrt (2/a) --> because 1/.5 = 2
So on the moon, it would take sqrt 2 times longer than that of the Earth

The time that we just calculated is the SECOND half of the projectile, which means that it's only half of the whole time. However, I don't think it matters because this is a ratio problem, not an absolute answer problem.
Sorry for the confusing wording, I know my answer and Bernoull's are different, and honestly, if someone could point out why is there a discrepancy, I would appreciate it.

JohnDoe: what does the solutions say? I'm curious.
 
The answer is two times. I put sqrt(2) times like you did, and got it wrong. I still don't understand why.
 
I remember that question. This is how I thought about it. All you have to do is remember the simple Vf=Vo+at. Like in your initial post, lets just care about one half of the trip whether it be up to the top or back down to your hand it doesn't matter. Not caring about signs you get V=at, since one of the V's equals 0. Therefore t=V/a. if a is 1/2 earths gravity, then t=2V. Therefore, the whole trip takes twice as long because if it takes twice as long going up, and twice as long coming down, then the whole trip is twice as long.....if thats confusing just think if the times on earth are 1 for up, and 1 for down the total time is 2 seconds, that would mean on the moon its 2 up and 2 down, for a total of 4.....twice as long. Hope that helps.
 
I guess what would help even more is if someone could explain why/where mine and phillips' logic is incorrect.

Physics is universal. The formulas should all simplify to one another. It's impossible to get a question right using only one formula but not another. We're both overlooking some simple thing... what is it?
 
I don't know if it somehow cancels out, but how are you assuming vo = 0 initially? vo is most definitely not 0, otherwise it wouldn't be moving upward in the first place.
 
The flaw is here, in phillips explanation he is assuming that y, or the height the object is thrown is the same on the moon as it is on the earth. if you think about it, you can see that just from converting all the kinetic energy into potential with 1/2mv^2=mgh...the masses cancel so you have 1/2 v^2=gh...since both are thrown with the same initial velocity, and g is halved on the earth, therefore h is doubled on the moon. That should clear up Phillips calculations, and is the flaw in that reasoning. At least as far as I can tell
 
sorry, in my last post I say g is halved on earth...obviously that supposed to say halved on the moon. Also in response to the previous comment.....if you are looking at the first half of the trip from your hand up to its highest point...at the highest point the velocity is zero. If you are looking at the second half of the trip from the top to the bottom, then Vo is zero and that is what I was referring to.
 
The flaw is here, in phillips explanation he is assuming that y, or the height the object is thrown is the same on the moon as it is on the earth. if you think about it, you can see that just from converting all the kinetic energy into potential with 1/2mv^2=mgh...the masses cancel so you have 1/2 v^2=gh...since both are thrown with the same initial velocity, and g is halved on the earth, therefore h is doubled on the moon. That should clear up Phillips calculations, and is the flaw in that reasoning. At least as far as I can tell

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS. dx is no longer the same in dx = vo*t - 1/2*a*t^2.

AHHHHHHHHHHHHH. You're wonderful. Thanks. I can sleep peacefully now.
 
Top