Gravity and Terminal Velocity: Understanding the Relationship

AI Thread Summary
A skydiver's terminal velocity is primarily determined by the balance of gravitational force and air resistance, which changes very little with altitude due to the Earth's large radius. Although gravity increases slightly as one falls, the effect is negligible at typical skydiving altitudes, resulting in minimal changes to terminal velocity. Adding weight increases terminal velocity because it enhances gravitational force, allowing the object to overcome air resistance more effectively. The gravitational force is based on distance from the Earth's center, not just the height above ground. Ultimately, the relationship between gravity and terminal velocity is complex but remains consistent at common skydiving altitudes.
curtmorehouse
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Newbie question here, so sorry if it is silly to those in the know..

If a skydiver reaches his terminal velocity because the drag caused by air at height x, why isn't the gravity at x/2 strong enough to overcome the already reached terminal velocity? It seems to me that a falling object would reach terminal velocity for the gravity and drag at that point in the fall (x), but ever increasing gravitational pull should overcome the previously experienced drag.

Like if I jump out of a plane with a parachute, my terminal velocity will be N. But if I jump out with a parachute and a 100 lb weight strapped to my body, I'll fall faster, ie. have a greater terminal velocity. Thre greater weight causes an acceleration through the terminal velocity N to the new terminal velocity W. Isn't relative gravity like adding weight for decreasing distance from an object?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!

curtmorehouse said:
If a skydiver reaches his terminal velocity because the drag caused by air at height x, why isn't the gravity at x/2 strong enough to overcome the already reached terminal velocity? It seems to me that a falling object would reach terminal velocity for the gravity and drag at that point in the fall (x), but ever increasing gravitational pull should overcome the previously experienced drag.

Hi curtmorehouse! Welcome to PF! :smile:

In principle, you're right about x/2 …

but (you knew there was a "but", didn't you? :wink:) the percentage difference in distance from the Earth's centre is so small that the terminal velocity would be increased by a factor of less than .0001. :smile:

(of course, if you fall far enough, the difference will become noticeable … but it will be more than canceled by the increase in air density, and therefore in air resistance! :rolleyes:)
 
Just to clarify tiny-tim's point, in case curt isn't aware of this... the gravitational force on an object depends on the distance from the center of the earth, not on the distance from the ground. The radius of the Earth is 6378 km, so if you fall from a height of 5 km to 1 km, your distance from the center of the Earth changes from 6383 to 6379 km, a difference of about 0.06%.
 

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

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...
View full post »

Thread 'Average velocity as a weighted mean'

Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

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?
View full post »

Similar threads

Why Do Objects Only Reach 95% of Their Terminal Velocity?
Replies
7
Views
5K
Reason for motion after terminal velocity
Replies
12
Views
2K
Spacecraft Reentry - Drag Decrease?
Replies
12
Views
3K
Penetration of falling object into sediment (after water)
Replies
8
Views
2K
Why does a falling object experience constant acceleration due to gravity?
Replies
3
Views
1K
Terminal Velocity of a Cylinder Freefalling Through a Fluid
Replies
6
Views
10K
Why Does a Sphere Reach Terminal Velocity if Buoyant Force Exceeds Weight?
Replies
2
Views
1K
Weight in an elevator, at terminal velocity
Replies
7
Views
3K
Understanding Terminal Velocity
Replies
2
Views
3K
Terminal velocity in a vacuum.
Replies
10
Views
6K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top