Conservation of Momentum involving Vf, elastic collisions

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the conservation of momentum in elastic collisions, specifically addressing a problem involving two identical mass balls. The user initially calculated a final velocity of 12.5 m/s, assuming an elastic collision, but the textbook provided a different answer of 6.32 m/s at a 41.5-degree angle, which the user could not reconcile. The consensus is that the collision is indeed elastic, and the discrepancy likely arises from a mix-up in the textbook, as the calculated kinetic energies before and after the collision were equal (12.1 J). The discussion highlights the importance of understanding the conditions of the collision and the potential for errors in textbook problems.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of conservation of momentum principles
  • Familiarity with elastic and inelastic collisions
  • Knowledge of kinetic energy calculations
  • Ability to analyze two-dimensional collision scenarios
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of elastic and inelastic collisions in detail
  • Learn how to calculate kinetic energy before and after collisions
  • Explore two-dimensional collision problems in physics
  • Review common errors in physics textbooks and how to identify them
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics, educators teaching mechanics, and anyone interested in understanding the nuances of collision dynamics and momentum conservation.

ericcy
Messages
19
Reaction score
1
Homework Statement
A billiard ball of mass 0.155kg moves with a velocity of 12.5m/s toward a stationary billiard ball of identical mass and strikes it in a head-on collision. The first billiard ball comes to a complete stop. Determine whether the collision was elastic.
Relevant Equations
Pt=Pt`
m1v1+m2v2=m1v1`+m2v2`
I tried solving it using this method and I got 12.5m/s, and assumed the collision was elastic.

The answer is actually 6.32m/s [41.5 degrees counterclockwise from the original direction of the first ball]; the collision is not elastic: Ek = 12.1J Ek`= 10.2J

I have absolutely no idea how the textbook could even get this answer. If you could explain the steps and why that would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Please show the details of your calculation. If the collision is head-on, there is no scattering angle involved. Where did the 41.5 deg. counterclockwise come from?
 
That was the textbooks answer, I have no idea how they got that. The collision is head-on. I used m1v1=m2v2` and subbed in all the values except for v2` and got 12.5m/s for m2. This means that when I solved for the total energies before and after the collision to check if it was elastic, they were both the same (12.1=12.1). Would you say my answer is right?
 
ericcy said:
That was the textbooks answer, I have no idea how they got that. The collision is head-on. I used m1v1=m2v2` and subbed in all the values except for v2` and got 12.5m/s for m2. This means that when I solved for the total energies before and after the collision to check if it was elastic, they were both the same (12.1=12.1). Would you say my answer is right?
Yes. When balls of identical mass collide and the collision is elastic, they simply exchange velocities. This is the case here. I have no idea where the textbook got that answer either. Are there more parts to this problem? Maybe the answer belongs to a different part.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ericcy
kuruman said:
Yes. When balls of identical mass collide and the collision is elastic, they simply exchange velocities. This is the case here. I have no idea where the textbook got that answer either. Are there more parts to this problem? Maybe the answer belongs to a different part.
Nope. Just that question. That's what made me so confused because I had literally no idea whatsoever how they could have gotten that answer. Must have been a mix up. Thanks for the confirmation on the answer :)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: kuruman
You were rightfully confused. The answer appears to belong to a two-dimensional collision problem. :oldsmile:
 
Curiously, the 12.1J does match the initial linear KE in the question. I think a lot of these textbook errors come about because someone adapted an existing question and failed to update the answer.

But there is anyway another problem here. It does not say exactly how the first ball was moving. If it had traveled any distance it would surely have been rolling, so its total KE would have been 17J. If the collision lost no mechanical energy, the second ball must have set off with the same rotation rate, but since that would have come about by static friction the second ball's rotation would be backspin.
 

Similar threads

Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K