Finding the Mistake in Falling Objects in an Elevator

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the dynamics of an object falling inside an upward-moving elevator. It highlights that the object experiences only gravitational force, and its velocity relative to the ground must account for the elevator's upward motion. Errors in the initial calculations are identified, particularly regarding the object's velocity and the elevator's movement during the collision. The participants emphasize that the object does not simply reverse its velocity upon bouncing, as the elevator's position changes during the fall. The conclusion stresses the importance of correctly interpreting the frame of reference and the relative motion involved.
llandau
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
1. An elevator is moving upward with constant velocity V. We consider a frame of reference fixed to the elevator. Since it is not accelerating, our system is equivalent to, say, a frame of reference fixed to the ground (there are no inertial forces). Now, we are inside the elevator and let an object fall from a height h. The only force acting is gravity. If there is an elastic collision with the floor, the object will reach the same height h, as we expected.

2. If v=-gt is the velocity of the object relative to the ground, the velocity for an observer inside the elevator must be v'=-gt-V. So, x'=-(1/2)gt^2-Vt. At t=0, x'=h. We find that, when x'=0, v'=-sqrt(V^2+2hg). After the collision, the object will start moving upward with velocity sqrt(V^2+2hg) but it seems to me that it will reach a height less than h: h+V^2/g-(V/g)sqrt(V^2+2hg).

There must be a mistake somewhere. Can you help me finding it?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
llandau said:
2. If v=-gt is the velocity of the object relative to the ground, the velocity for an observer inside the elevator must be v'=-gt-V.
Presumably the object is released from rest relative to the elevator? If so, then v = -gt is its velocity relative to the elevator and -gt+V is its velocity relative to the ground.
 
You've made two errors:
1) Relative to the fixed frame, the floor of the lift is moving downwards. When the ball bounces, it will not just reverse its velocity. What do you expect to happen if the lift is falling very quickly, and the ball is only just catching the floor up?
2) Bear in mind that by the time the ball has bounced, the elevator will have moved down so you must compensate for this in calculating the new height from the lift floor.
 
Henry: read the question again. The elevator is moving upwards, not downwards.

llandau: I agree with Doc Al. I would assume that the object began at rest relative to the elevator.
 
cjl said:
Henry: read the question again. The elevator is moving upwards, not downwards.

Oops, sorry misread that. Or: I took at as moving downwards with speed -V :wink:.Either way, the point still stands. What if the elevator is moving upwards at enormous speed, and the ball is going really slowly when it hits the floor? You certainly wouldn't expect it to just reverse its direction and maintain its speed, since it'd have to fall out the bottom of the lift to do that. It has to reverse its direction and maintain its speed relative to the floor of the lift.

And for the record, I also agree with Doc Al and cjl.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top