Find the acceleration of an elevator

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the acceleration of an elevator based on varying weights and masses, with an initial mass of 45 kg and weights of 36 kg and 47 kg during downward and upward motion, respectively. Participants express confusion over the question's wording, suggesting it should refer to weight in Newtons rather than mass in kilograms, as mass does not change in an elevator. The calculations provided yield an upward acceleration of 0.436 m/s², but the validity of the initial mass figures is questioned. There is also a humorous exchange about the existence of very small people, highlighting the absurdity of the scenario. Ultimately, the conversation emphasizes the importance of precise language in physics problems and the need to adhere to expected units for clarity.
patrilu5
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Find the acceleration of an elevator going upwards and downwards if your initial mass is 45 kg, when its going downwards is 36 kg, and when its going upwards is 47 kg.

Homework Equations



F=ma

The Attempt at a Solution


W=45(9.8)
W=441 N

W=47(9.8)
W=460.6 N

T=m(a+9.8)
460.6=45(a+9.8)
460.6=45a+441
19.6=45a
0.436 m/s^2= upward acceleration

Is this right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


I don't think this question makes sense. Your mass can't change in an elevator unless it's an elevator that can take bites out of you.
 


I assume the question was meant to say 'weight' instead of mass, in which case it should be in Newtons rather than kilograms?
 
JHamm said:
I assume the question was meant to say 'weight' instead of mass, in which case it should be in Newtons rather than kilograms?

Yes, and in which case this would be a tiny, tiny person.
 


1MileCrash said:
Yes, and in which case this would be a tiny, tiny person.
45 N humans do exist. I've seen them. Perfectly formed little people, with little faces, and little smiles, wearing specially made little boots to fit their little feet. Perfect in every detail, but just tiny, tiny all over. It's just like seeing minatures of real people, you could say.

On the other hand, the question does say "your" initial mass, and I'm quite sure none of these tiny people would be reading these maths questions.

Maybe it was meant to be initial weight of 45 kg wt, not an initial mass of 45 kg.
 
Last edited:
NascentOxygen said:
45 kg people do exist. I've seen them. Perfectly formed little people, with little faces, and little smiles, wearing specially made little shoes to fit their little feet. Perfect in every detail, but just tiny, tiny all over. It's just like seeing minatures of the real thing, you could say.

And if the units are supposed to be Newtons, which is the point... have you seen a person that weighed 45 Newtons before? Maybe, but the umbilical cord was literally just cut.
 


NascentOxygen said:
Maybe it was meant to be initial weight of 45 kg wt, not an initial mass of 45 kg.

If it was worded exactly like posted on a test, I'd honestly write "Trick question, your mass doesn't change due to acceleration." or some other statement.

In fact, I'd even be annoyed if it read "45 kg wt" because kilograms simply is not a unit of weight.
 


1MileCrash said:
If it was worded exactly like posted on a test, I'd honestly write "Trick question, your mass doesn't change due to acceleration." or some other statement.
If the ride was really scary, you could lose half a kilo by vomiting. But it's hard to reconcile that with the rest of the question ...

kilograms simply is not a unit of weight.
Yes, but some teachers don't know that. You've got to give them the answer they want if you want the marks. That's the first important lesson you learn at school. o:)

Though kg wt is a perfectly valid unit of weight
 
Back
Top