Why Are Bouncing Balls Spherical for Optimal Performance?

  • Thread starter Thread starter minnielala
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
Bouncing balls are designed to be spherical to ensure uniform distribution of force upon impact, which optimizes their bounce and performance. A spherical shape allows for consistent contact with surfaces, minimizing irregular bounces that would occur with non-spherical shapes like cubes. When dropped at different angles, a cube would likely produce unpredictable bounces due to its flat surfaces and edges. Additionally, the half-spherical shape of mountain tents is advantageous as it reduces wind resistance and enhances stability in harsh weather conditions. Overall, the spherical design in both balls and tents maximizes functionality and efficiency in their respective environments.
minnielala
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Could someone explain all the reasons that balls made to bounce are spherical? Bouncing = collision, so I guess I mean any ball that is meant to collide.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Here's a question for you: if the ball were not round, say it were a cube (like a large dice) how do you think it would bounce? What would happen if you dropped it at different angles? Or with a slight sipn?
 
Hi, minnielala:
Just a follow-up question to Dave's:
In Norway, where I live, some people like to camp in the mountains and on the flat, barren mountain plateaus (yes, Norwegians ARE weird..).

The tents that are used are called "mountain tents", and have the shape of a half-sphere.
Can you give a reason why the sphere form is the smartest way to construct a functional mountain tent?
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top