So let's say you're standing on a linoleum floor and you have a basketball and a golf ball. You drop the golf ball from a height of 6 feet and because of the conservation of momentum, it bounces back up a distance X. You do the same with the basketball and it bounces back up a distance of Y. So then you make the assumption that if you drop the two balls together with the golf ball sitting on top of the basketball, the two momentums will add together and the golf ball will bounce back a distance of X + Y. But in actuality, the distance bounced is far greater. Why does this happen?
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Question about physics
- Thread starter Bardolph
- Start date
When you drop the two together the golf ball will bounce off the basketball, which is moving, and that would help to project it further than if it bounced off the floor, which is stationary.
We already know it's going to be a larger bounce. The distance wrongfully predicted is that the sum of the two individual bounces will equal the distance of the "team bounce," but it exceeds even that.
xyllion
Commercial User
- Jan 14, 2003
- 2,132
- 185
- 62
- Disclosures
- Owner, Looperlative Audio Products
I don't feel like figuring out the math, but the conservation of momentum says that mass times velocity will be the same before and after the impact. After the impact, the balls will decelerate at a rate determined by gravity. Deceleration is not linear, therefore the distance travelled is not a linear function of the starting velocity.
I'll leave the detailed calculations to someone else. At the age of 40, I don't feel like doing your homework for you.
I'll leave the detailed calculations to someone else. At the age of 40, I don't feel like doing your homework for you.
As Pete said, the ball acts as a trampoline, and there is also a transference of energy to the golf ball from the bounce of the basketball. Hence, the basketball most likely won't go quite as high as it should. Instead, some of that energy will be transfered to the lighter golf ball, sending it higher.
Leigh
Leigh
Eskimo, of course adding the heights issn't the way to do it.
The way to do it is to add the forces. The basketball has a much higher mass, and therefore a much higher force than the golfball. It's mass times acceleration you need to be concerned about, not height.
The way to do it is to add the forces. The basketball has a much higher mass, and therefore a much higher force than the golfball. It's mass times acceleration you need to be concerned about, not height.
You're delving into elasticity, which is VERY hard to calculate.
Given that the golf ball is lighter, and is landing not upon a hard surface but on a moving elastic surface, not oly does it not hit that surface as hard (because the surface itself is moving away from the golf ball) but it gets a little shove when the basket ball returns to it's nominal shape and rebounds from the floor. So your equation should not be X+Y, but X+Yx3/4Z (or something like that, where Z is the amoun of energy released from the elastic reshaping of the basketball.)
I could be very wrong. If you want to go weirder, though, put the golf ball on the bottom.
Rock on
Eric
Given that the golf ball is lighter, and is landing not upon a hard surface but on a moving elastic surface, not oly does it not hit that surface as hard (because the surface itself is moving away from the golf ball) but it gets a little shove when the basket ball returns to it's nominal shape and rebounds from the floor. So your equation should not be X+Y, but X+Yx3/4Z (or something like that, where Z is the amoun of energy released from the elastic reshaping of the basketball.)
I could be very wrong. If you want to go weirder, though, put the golf ball on the bottom.
Rock on
Eric
Now combine Davidoc's comment about force and the other comments about the basketball acting as a trampoline and you have the right answer.
Oh, and you can also add air resistance into this one, which makes it even more of a mess. But let's just assume that we're not including that either.
What is that supposed to mean? If you really want a perfect answer, shall I go and get my dad who is a physics teacher?Bad_Habit_Bassist said:
P+M*V
So momentum is equal to mass times velocity.
The Basketball has much more mass than the golf ball.
Then there's the Conservation of Momentum, Very involved equation dealing with vector changes, Pressure changes, mass, area blah blah blah.
So just like in that clicking ball game ,5 balls on strings set the 1st ball in motion and and only the last ball gets pushed away, Thats due to the conservation of momentum. If the first ball had the mass of a basketball and the others a golf ball, you would see that once set in motion the energy would be more than sufficient to push off the last ball, all the balls and the basketball would continue.
So the basketball has more mass than the golf ball and ergo greater potential enegy, when the balls "transfer energy" afer being droped and then rebounded. the greater mass of the basket ball propels the golf ball "with less mass" to a faster velocity. But momentum is conservered!!! P=M*V
So momentum is equal to mass times velocity.
The Basketball has much more mass than the golf ball.
Then there's the Conservation of Momentum, Very involved equation dealing with vector changes, Pressure changes, mass, area blah blah blah.
So just like in that clicking ball game ,5 balls on strings set the 1st ball in motion and and only the last ball gets pushed away, Thats due to the conservation of momentum. If the first ball had the mass of a basketball and the others a golf ball, you would see that once set in motion the energy would be more than sufficient to push off the last ball, all the balls and the basketball would continue.
So the basketball has more mass than the golf ball and ergo greater potential enegy, when the balls "transfer energy" afer being droped and then rebounded. the greater mass of the basket ball propels the golf ball "with less mass" to a faster velocity. But momentum is conservered!!! P=M*V
Nickthebassist said:What is that supposed to mean? If you really want a perfect answer, shall I go and get my dad who is a physics teacher?
Read the other explanations as to how the system works with elasticity, and you'll see how totally wrong you were, and I knew this, being a 4th year Physics student, an Engineering Physics and an Aerospace Engineering major at Embry-Riddle. Your dad may be a physics professor, but that does not make you one.
Ray
The basketball has a greater mass. Weighs more. Falls to the floor quicker, so it is bouncing back up while the golf ball is falling down. The golf ball will have a +ve momentum, and the basketball will have a -ve momentum. When they collide, the momentums are exchanged. example:
Golf ball: 1kg 1m/s = 1Kgm/s
Basketball 3kg 3m/s = 9Kgm/s
Then think of it as the objects travelling towards each other.
the golf ball will accelerate. The actual result will be greater because the basketball will absorb energy and bounce the ball back even further
But, that is only the theoretical idea. You should have stated if it was an elastic collision.
If not, tough, the maths behind it will be too hard
Golf ball: 1kg 1m/s = 1Kgm/s
Basketball 3kg 3m/s = 9Kgm/s
Then think of it as the objects travelling towards each other.
the golf ball will accelerate. The actual result will be greater because the basketball will absorb energy and bounce the ball back even further
But, that is only the theoretical idea. You should have stated if it was an elastic collision.
If not, tough, the maths behind it will be too hard
+1 They fall to the floor at the same speed, if I do believe.Davidoc said:Uhoh!!!!
EDIT: You guys beat me to it.
