Can an Object Have Acceleration at Zero Velocity?

Click For Summary
An object can have acceleration even when its velocity is zero, as seen when it reaches maximum height after being thrown upwards. At this point, the velocity is zero, but gravity continues to exert a downward acceleration of -9.8 m/s². The misconception arises from equating zero velocity with zero acceleration, which is incorrect since acceleration is influenced by gravity. An object at rest on the floor does not experience acceleration because the upward force from the floor balances the gravitational force. Understanding these dynamics clarifies the relationship between velocity and acceleration in physics.
Diego Fernandez
Messages
21
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I'm taking my first basic physics course and I came across this simple question (which I got the wrong answer apparently). The question was this: what is the velocity and acceleration of an object which has reached it's maximum height after being thrown directly upwards?

Homework Equations


[/B]
Well, you don't really need equations for this, unless you want to mathematically prove your answer. In that case:

Acceleration = (Velocity - Initial Velocity) / Time
Time = Distance / Average Velocity
Velocity = Initial Velocity + Acceleration(Time)
Distance = Initial Position + Average Velocity(Time)

These are very basic Kinematic equations.

The Attempt at a Solution



What I answered was that the velocity is 0 (which was correct) and that the acceleration was also 0 (which was incorrect). I went by the test a little too fast and realized my answer was most likely wrong after comparing answers with other students. The mistake I made was assuming that since it was at 0 velocity, there couldn't possibly be any acceleration whatsoever, but I did not take into account that acceleration = gravity. Since gravity is always influencing an object, there must be a rate of acceleration (-9,8 m/s). But my question is how could there possibly be an acceleration for an object which has a velocity of 0?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The velocity is zero only at one instant of time. A second earlier it was positive (the ball was moving upward), and, a second later, it was negative (the ball was moving downward). So the velocity was decreasing the whole 2 seconds of time.

P.S., You chose a really great avatar. I thought that the Tyson Cosmos series was wonderful, and I enjoyed it immensely.

Chet
 
Chestermiller said:
The velocity is zero only at one instant of time. A second earlier it was positive (the ball was moving upward), and, a second later, it was negative (the ball was moving downward). So the velocity was decreasing the whole 2 seconds of time.

P.S., You chose a really great avatar. I thought that the Tyson Cosmos series was wonderful, and I enjoyed it immensely.

Chet

I see. So gravity is a constant influence on the movement of objects, regardless of their velocity. Then could you say that an object lying on the floor with no movement also has an acceleration? Since gravity is applying a downward force on it. But my question has been answered, thank you very much.

P.S., Haha thanks, I loved the show more than any other I've ever watched.
 
Diego Fernandez said:
Then could you say that an object lying on the floor with no movement also has an acceleration? Since gravity is applying a downward force on it.
No. If the object is lying on the floor, there is another force acting on it besides gravity. It is the upward force of the floor on the object. This upward force cancels the downward force of gravity, so the object is not accelerating.

Chet
 
Chestermiller said:
No. If the object is lying on the floor, there is another force acting on it besides gravity. It is the upward force of the floor on the object. This upward force cancels the downward force of gravity, so the object is not accelerating.

Now I understand. Thank you for your help!
 
The book claims the answer is that all the magnitudes are the same because "the gravitational force on the penguin is the same". I'm having trouble understanding this. I thought the buoyant force was equal to the weight of the fluid displaced. Weight depends on mass which depends on density. Therefore, due to the differing densities the buoyant force will be different in each case? Is this incorrect?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
889
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
867
Replies
1
Views
787
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K