Find acceleration only given distance of slop and angle of elevation.

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves a puck released from the top of a frictionless slope, with a specified length and angle of elevation. The original poster seeks to determine the acceleration of the puck and the time it takes to descend the slope, despite lacking a mass value.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster considers using a free body diagram to find the net force and subsequently the acceleration, but expresses confusion due to the absence of mass. Some participants suggest that mass may not be necessary for the solution and encourage exploring the problem with a symbolic representation of mass.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing hints and encouraging the original poster to reconsider the role of mass in the problem. There is a focus on understanding the implications of the problem setup rather than reaching a definitive solution.

Contextual Notes

The problem is constrained by the lack of a specific mass value, which has led to questions about its necessity in determining acceleration. The nature of the slope being frictionless is also a key aspect under consideration.

avsj
Messages
26
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A puck is let go on the top of a frictionless slope. The slope is length .74 m and 3.5 degrees above the horizontal. What is the acceleration and how long does it take the puck to go down the slope?


Homework Equations



Fnet=ma
Fg=mg?


The Attempt at a Solution



If I was given m, I could just draw a free body diagram and find Fnet down the slope and then use m to find acceleration using Fnet=ma

Without mass, I am quite lost? Can it be done?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You don't need a specific value for mass to draw a free body diagram--just call it "m". Hint: Perhaps the answer doesn't depend on m. :wink:
 
Although you're not given an explicit value for m,
can you attempt to solve the problem assuming a nonzero value for m?
If you can, you might see why an explicit value wasn't given.

[ doh... i hesistated too long [by rereading my post] o:)]
 
Thanks Doc Al :D
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K