Gravity: Explaining the Mysteries of Weight and Falling

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jow
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gravity
AI Thread Summary
Objects fall at the same rate due to gravity, but air resistance affects their descent, causing lighter objects like paper to fall slower than heavier ones like a book. When two objects of the same shape and size but different masses are dropped, they experience different air resistance, leading to different fall rates in the atmosphere. The equation F = Gm1m2 / r^2 indicates that while gravity acts on all masses equally, air resistance is not dependent on mass, which explains the varying fall rates. In a vacuum, where air resistance is absent, all objects fall at the same rate regardless of mass. Understanding these principles clarifies why mass influences falling speed in real-world conditions.
Jow
Messages
69
Reaction score
0
I love physics, but I find that I am ignorant about some of the more basic concepts, so forgive me if this question may sound a bit foolish.
My teacher the other day demonstrated that all objects fall at the same rate on earth. The only reason things don't seem to follow this rules is because of air resistance. He showed that when flat, paper falls slower than a golf ball, but when crumpled to the size of the golfball they fall at the same rate.
I have two questions about this. I know that a book will fall faster than a piece of paper of the same shape and size. I tested at home to make sure. If it has nothing to do with weight than why does the book fall faster?
Also, shouldn't weight, or mass make a difference. If F = Gm1m2 / r^2, than surely the more massive something is than the faster it will fall. My textbook answers neither of these questions, so it would be much aporeciated if you could answer them. Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Jow,

For your first question, you can't simply neglect the weight or the mass of the book because its already clear that F = ma.

Its already stated that mass is related to acceleration (gravity).
 
Jow said:
but when crumpled to the size of the golfball they fall at the same rate.
That is not true. Two objects of exactly the same shape/size, but different mass fall at different rates in the atmosphere. Only in vacuum the acceleration is the same, because gravity is the only force acting and proportional to mass. But air resistance is not dependent of mass. At the same velocity the opposing air resistance is the same for both objects, but the weight is different. So the net force and acceleration are different. At low velocities the drag is low, and the difference is not noticeable which allows the teacher to fool the students.
 
Jow said:
If F = Gm1m2 / r^2, than surely the more massive something is than the faster it will fall. My textbook answers neither of these questions, so it would be much aporeciated if you could answer them. Thank you.
And F=m1a. Combine both equations, and you get a = Gm2/r^2, which depends on the mass of Earth but not on the mass of the falling object. If the falling object has a mass similar to earth, you would have to take the motion of Earth into account, but that can be neglected for any realistic experiment.
 
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=511172
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'

Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'

Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
View full post »

Thread 'Do electron density waves accompany EM waves in coaxial cables?'

Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
View full post »
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'

Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'

The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...
View full post »

Similar threads

B Time to fall from 200 miles
Replies
8
Views
2K
B A contradiction of the equivalence principle?
2
Replies
99
Views
5K
I Calculating your weight in an elevator
Replies
24
Views
3K
Is acceleration still equal in the presence of air resistance?
Replies
30
Views
6K
B Mobility in a Strong Gravity Environment vs. Moving Mass?
Replies
10
Views
1K
Can a Vortex Effectively Purify Water by Utilizing Gravity?
Replies
2
Views
1K
B Trying to understand orbiting objects in space
Replies
8
Views
2K
Free fall does'nt consider weight
Replies
2
Views
2K
I Will the spinning gyroscope make the plumb fall slower?
Replies
3
Views
1K
Testing Newtonian Gravity: Collision of Two Masses
Replies
17
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top