Why Can't We Calculate the Height of a Ball Thrown Up Without Air Resistance?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the maximum height a ball can reach when thrown straight up, specifically under the assumption of no air resistance. The subject area includes concepts from energy conservation and kinematics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster questions the feasibility of calculating the height without air resistance and seeks clarification on the underlying principles. Some participants discuss the relationship between kinetic energy (KE) and potential energy (PE) in the context of the problem. Others inquire about the formulas involved and the implications of adding air resistance to the scenario.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants exploring different interpretations of the problem. Some have provided insights into the energy conservation approach, while others have introduced considerations regarding air resistance and its effects on the calculations. There is no explicit consensus yet on the best approach to take.

Contextual Notes

Participants are considering the impact of air resistance on the calculations, with discussions about how to account for variables such as cross-sectional area and speed. The original poster's mention of a maximum height introduces additional complexity to the problem.

elissadi
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
If a 3 kg ball is thrown straight up at 40 m/s, using energy conservation, calculate how high the ball would go if there was no wind resistance.

I was told this could not be calculated. Is that true? and if so, why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
why not, loss in KE = gain in PE ?
 
What is the formula?
What if I added, let's say, a max. height like 75 m. Could energy lost, like due to friction with the air on the way up be calculated?
 
This can be done by looking at a symmetric problem. Assume the ball does decelerate to 0. Then by symmetry, solve the problem of how far it would have had to accelerate under gravity near the Earth's surface to get to 40 m/s, since assuming it loses no energy to air resistance this is the velocity it would return with to the person's hand.
If you want to add in air resistance, you have to account for the cross-sectional area of the ball (A), as a sheet of paper will fall slower than a crumpled up piece. Similarly, a styrofoam ball will encounter more resistance than a rubber ball, so density (d) is inversely proportional to the air resistance. Next, stick your hand out when you're walking. Compare it to sticking your hand out when you're running or in a car. Speed (v) is thus proportional to air resistance. We're insterested in the distance the ball will travel. m is the mass of the ball. So far we have the rudimentary 1-dimensional net force equation ma = mg - A*d*v. But v is not a constant, it is a function of time, so we have to solve the differential equation m*dv/dt = - mg - A*d*v for speed v or m*d2x/dt2 = - mg - A*d*dx/dt for distance x. This simple model has many more refinements placed on it based on the speed of the object and the type of resistance, but solving it will already allow you to see simple behavior like terminal velocity. :smile:
Since the energy lost by the ball is equivalent to the work done by the air resistance on the ball, you want to calculate the total work done by air resistance in the above equations, which would require integration, since the air resistance is also a function of time.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
14K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
5K