Distance traveled at end of second interval: 27m

AI Thread Summary
An object falling five meters during the first time interval will fall a total distance of 20 meters by the end of the second interval, according to the principles of constant acceleration. The distance fallen in successive intervals is proportional to the odd numbers, which means the distances for the first two intervals are 5 meters and 15 meters, respectively. The discussion emphasizes the importance of using the correct kinematic equations derived from Newton's laws rather than guessing. It also highlights how Galileo's observations of falling bodies relate to these principles, specifically the cumulative distance covered over time intervals. Understanding these relationships is crucial for accurately calculating the total distance fallen.
Ki-nana18
Messages
90
Reaction score
0
If an object falls five meters during the first interval of time, what is the total distance fallen at the end of the second interval of time? (Galileo's Theory of falling bodies)

I know that at successive intervals of time the distance fallen is proportional to the odd numbers. So I suspect it to be 12, but apparently I'm wrong.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The distance traveled by a body moving under constant acceleration is given by a well-known equation that is derived from Newton's laws. There is no need to guess! I would look into this equation...

Further comments

It doesn't really make much sense to me to break up the problem into discrete steps like this. Also, "proportional to the odd numbers" doesn't make much sense to me. Even more strangely, your guess, 12, is an even number.

EDIT: On second thought, once you know the formula, then you can break it up into steps (time intervals Δt) and you will see that the ratio of the *total* (cumulative) distance covered to the distance covered during the first time interval does depend upon the number (n) of intervals Δt that have occurred in a very specific way.
 
Galileo observed objects rolling down inclined planes. Using a pendulum as a timer, he observed that the distance of travel increased for every period of the pendulum, by consecutive odd number multiples of the distance traveled in the first interval. The kinematic equation for constant acceleration can be shown to agree with this observation, and it suggests a particular relationship between distance and time. (Calculate ∑{(2n-1)^2} where n is the interval number from n=1 to N, and then observe the dependence of N on n. The distance traveled is Nd, where d is the distance traveled in the first interval.) This is one way that Galileo determined the constant universal gravitational acceleration.

See, for example:
http://galileo.rice.edu/lib/student_work/experiment95/inclined_plane.html

Ki-nana:
It looks like you added 5m+7m=12m. That would be valid if the object traveled 5m in the third interval (and then 7m in the fourth interval). (5=2(3)-1, 7=2(4)-1) However, it travels 5m in the first interval, so the appropriate odd numbers are 1=2(1)-1 and 3=2(2)-1. Then, just multiply by the distance in the first interval.
 
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanged mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top