Gravity's Effect on Height: Function Explained

  • Thread starter Thread starter nhmllr
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function Gravity
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on deriving the correct function for height affected by gravity over time. The initial confusion involved two incorrect formulas, with the correct expression ultimately identified as height = initial height + initial upward velocity * time - 0.5 * gravity * time^2. The importance of the 1/2 factor is explained through the process of integration, which accounts for constant acceleration. Integrating the acceleration leads to the velocity and subsequently to the position formula, confirming the correct relationship. The clarification resolves the misunderstanding regarding the role of gravity in the height function.
nhmllr
Messages
183
Reaction score
1
If I were to create a function for height affected by gravity (as a function of time) would it be
height = initial upwards velocity * time - gravity * time2
OR
height = initial upwards velocity * time - 2 * gravity * time2
OR something else, and why?
I thought it would be the first one, but after trying to solve some problems, upon checking my work it seems like it would be the second one.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Good answer. But it has small differences.
height = initial height + initial upward velocity * time - 0.5* gravity * time^2
where moving direction is the counter gravity direction.
 
Doc Al said:
Neither of those are correct. The correct expression would be:
height = initial upwards velocity * time - 0.5 * gravity * time2

(Review the https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=905663&postcount=2".)

Ah. After reviewing my work, it turns out that I should have meant to divide by two instead of multiply.
In anycase, what is the reason behind that 1/2? What's it doing that makes it right? It probably has something to do with integrals, because it's in the t2 term, but what?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
nhmllr said:
It probably has something to do with integrals, because it's in the t2 term, but what?
The acceleration is constant. Integrating once gives the velocity:
v = v0 + at

A second integration gives the position:
x = x0 + v0t + 1/2at2

Setting x = height, x0 = 0, and a = -g, gives the equation you need:
h = v0t - 1/2gt2
 
Doc Al said:
The acceleration is constant. Integrating once gives the velocity:
v = v0 + at

A second integration gives the position:
x = x0 + v0t + 1/2at2

Setting x = height, x0 = 0, and a = -g, gives the equation you need:
h = v0t - 1/2gt2

Thanks, I get it now
 
Hello! Let's say I have a cavity resonant at 10 GHz with a Q factor of 1000. Given the Lorentzian shape of the cavity, I can also drive the cavity at, say 100 MHz. Of course the response will be very very weak, but non-zero given that the Loretzian shape never really reaches zero. I am trying to understand how are the magnetic and electric field distributions of the field at 100 MHz relative to the ones at 10 GHz? In particular, if inside the cavity I have some structure, such as 2 plates...
Back
Top