Bungy Jumping: Max Elastic Potential Energy Explained

  • Thread starter Thread starter 7bear
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Jump
AI Thread Summary
When a boy jumps in a bungee jump scenario, he initially has zero kinetic energy (KE) at the lowest point of the jump, where he is momentarily at rest. At this point, the elastic potential energy (PE) in the bungee cord is at its maximum. The transformation of energy begins with gravitational potential energy (PE) as he falls, which converts into kinetic energy as he descends. Upon reaching the lowest point, this kinetic energy is then transformed into elastic potential energy in the bungee cord. Thus, the sequence of energy transformation involves gravitational potential energy converting to kinetic energy and subsequently to elastic potential energy.
7bear
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
Suppose a boy is playing bumgy jump. When he jumps out and reachs the lowest bottom (instanteous at rest), there is zero K.E.
At that time, there is max. elelastic potential energy in the string. Which energy is changed to it(max. elelastic potential energy) :confused: ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
don't forget gravity

When the boy jumps he has zero KE but maximum gravitational PE (with respect to the ground). It's that gravitational PE which gets transformed into elastic PE.
 
Of course, the gravitationnal PE first turns into KE, which then turns into the elastic PE.
 

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
View full post »
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
View full post »

Similar threads

Help with IB Physics IA about bungee jumping....
Replies
16
Views
4K
Energy Balance During Bungy Jumping
Replies
2
Views
2K
How to relate the gravitational potential energy zero to the axes?
Replies
4
Views
2K
I How to interpret this definition of potential energy?
Replies
10
Views
2K
Physical interpretation of the "total potential energy"
Replies
20
Views
8K
I Lost Energy from a Reciprocating Piston
Replies
31
Views
3K
I Work-Energy Theorem for Moving Block and Spring System?
Replies
4
Views
2K
Jumping force, and weight lifting equivalence
Replies
8
Views
4K
Can Calculating a Horse's Leg Spring Constant Predict Jump Heights?
Replies
5
Views
3K
Effective potential in a central field
Replies
3
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top