Calculate Minimum Vertical Velocity for Salmon Jumping 1.9m Waterfall

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves calculating the minimum vertical velocity required for a salmon to jump over a waterfall that is 1.9 meters high. The context is rooted in kinematics, specifically relating to vertical motion under the influence of gravity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster considers using the kinematic equation Vf^2 = Vi^2 + 2ad, questioning whether the final or initial velocity should be set to zero. Participants discuss the implications of reaching the top of the waterfall and the corresponding final velocity.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, exploring the relationship between initial and final velocities. Some guidance has been provided regarding the final velocity when just reaching the top of the waterfall, but there is no explicit consensus on the approach to take.

Contextual Notes

There is an indication that some information may be missing, which could affect the calculations. The participants are navigating through the assumptions related to the problem setup.

inner08
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
In its final trip upstream to its spawning territory, a salmon jumps to the top of a waterfall 1.9m high. What is the minimum vertical velocity needed by the salmon to reach the top of the waterfall?

There seems to be some piece of information missing.
I know that:
a = 9.8 m/s^2
dy = 1.9m

I'm thinking i'll probably be using the formula (Vf^2 = Vi^2 + 2ad) so that would mean I need to have the Vf or the Vi. Would either of these be equal to zero?!

Any help is appreciated!

Thanks,
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You do know the final velocity. How fast will the salmon be traveling vertically if it only just reaches the top of the waterfall?
 
I guess it would have to be 0 if it only just reaches it. Sorry, I'm not very good with word problems.
 
inner08 said:
I guess it would have to be 0 if it only just reaches it. Sorry, I'm not very good with word problems.

You're right.

No need to apologise, I like formulae better myself, it's much harder to missinterpret a formula! :smile:
 
Thanks for your help :).
 
No problem :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
8K