In summary, the conversation on Physics Forums discusses an idealized example of jumping off the ground and how the force from the ground does not do any work, leading to the conclusion that the energy for the jump must come from elsewhere. The conversation then delves into the concept of idealized springs and how they can be used to simplify and focus on relevant aspects of a physics problem. It also touches on the role of our legs in the jumping process and how idealization is a common practice in physics to accurately describe real situations.
  • #1
Orodruin
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
21,063
12,118
It is relatively common on Physics Forums to see arguments that are effectively similar to the following:
When we jump off the ground, the ground does not move. Because of this, the force from the ground on us does zero total work. Since the force does no work, we cannot gain any kinetic energy. We therefore cannot jump off the ground.
Now, the conclusion here is obviously false. The world high jump record is 2.45 meters, definitely larger than zero. So where did the energy come from? This Insight seeks to clarify this in a fairly accessible way.

Table of Contents
An idealized exampleWhere is the...


[url="https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/how-can-we-jump-when-the-ground-does-no-work/"]Continue reading...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Likes ChiralSuperfields, Dale, DrClaude and 5 others
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You start with a horizontal spring but in the analysis you refer to "lower end" and energy flowing upward. It may be confusing.
 
  • #3
nasu said:
You start with a horizontal spring but in the analysis you refer to "lower end" and energy flowing upward. It may be confusing.
I’ll add ”in the figure”
 
  • #4
This is one of the "rare" (which is not so rare after all but it is rare regarding to what is being taught and problems solved in introductory physics) cases in physics where the force that changes the momentum is not the same with the force that changes the kinetic energy. In this example the force from the ground changes the momentum , but internal forces in the knee and in the torso change the kinetic energy.
 
  • #5
Wouldn't the explanation be simpler with a spring that is not attached to the wall (so no oscillation)?
 
  • Wow
Likes Delta2
  • #6
DrClaude said:
Wouldn't the explanation be simpler with a spring that is not attached to the wall (so no oscillation)?
Nope. From conservation of momentum, the body can't attain substantial momentum because the spring has negligible mass hence it has negligible momentum after the decompression happens.
 
  • #7
Delta2 said:
Nope. From conservation of momentum, the body can't attain substantial momentum because the spring has negligible mass hence it has negligible momentum after the decompression happens.
Sorry, but I don't see how the spring being attached or not to the wall changes anything in this respect.
 
  • #8
DrClaude said:
Sorry, but I don't see how the spring being attached or not to the wall changes anything in this respect.
If the spring is not attached to the wall, there is no external force to the spring+mass system so its momentum is conserved.
 
  • #9
Delta2 said:
If the spring is not attached to the wall, there is no external force to the spring+mass system so its momentum is conserved.
The spring is not being de-coupled from the wall entirely. It is still prevented from interpenetrating. It can push. But it is detached so that it cannot pull. It is not glued, nailed, screwed or otherwise fastened down.
 
  • #10
jbriggs444 said:
The spring is not being de-coupled from the wall entirely. It is still prevented from interpenetrating. It can push. But it is detached so that it cannot pull. It is not glued, nailed, screwed or otherwise fastened down.
Ok I see it can push but not pull, in that case momentum is not conserved and yes we will not have oscillation.
 
  • #11
DrClaude said:
Wouldn't the explanation be simpler with a spring that is not attached to the wall (so no oscillation)?
The spring is not attached to the wall for this very reason. I might have made it clearer in the first image though. Also note that I have been careful to only discuss the launch up to the time when the spring is back to its unloaded length.
 
  • Like
Likes DrClaude
  • #12
Delta2 said:
If the spring is not attached to the wall, there is no external force to the spring+mass system so its momentum is conserved.
It does not need to be physically fixed to the wall to compress the spring.
 
  • #13
In the article, it says that the spring doesn't have mass. So what would the spring be in real life? I'm confused since I am still a middle schooler.
 
  • #14
It is what we call an idealised spring. It does not exist in reality. It is a way to be able to neglect certain aspects in order to focus on the relevant issues in a physics problem while still getting a reasonably accurate result for many situations where you have a spring that is close to being ideal. An ideal spring has no mass and responds to compression and elongation with a linear force. A real life spring does neither of those except approximately.
 
  • #15
Btw @Orodruin implies that our legs play the role of the spring as we first bend them and lower our self down (compression of spring) and then we de -bend them (sorry my english fail here can't find the proper word) in order to jump high.
 
  • #16
Effectively it is a description of how stored energy can be released without the ground doing any work. To use an idealised spring is a way to be able to focus on how the energy flows in the system without the complications of needing to also discuss the kinetic energy in the launch mechanism. Similarities and differences in the case of a jump are discussed at the end.
 
  • Like
Likes Chikitai
  • #17
Orodruin said:
It is what we call an idealised spring. It does not exist in reality. It is a way to be able to neglect certain aspects in order to focus on the relevant issues in a physics problem while still getting a reasonably accurate result for many situations where you have a spring that is close to being ideal. An ideal spring has no mass and responds to compression and elongation with a linear force. A real life spring does neither of those except approximately.
So is it like those physics problems that say "calculate acceleration neglecting air resistance"?
 
  • #18
Yes. Unlike mathematics, a big part of physics is about making descriptions of real situations that may not be completely accurate but are accurate enough to describe what you want at a sufficiently precise level.
 
  • #19
Another reason to deal with idealisation is to be able to highlight certain aspects of a problem without running into unnecessary complications. This is the case here. What is being discussed is how a force from the ground can lead to an object moving without providing any work within the context of classical mechanics. The example highlights this.
 
  • #20
So I'm digging WAY back here to high school and college physics, but in classical mechanics, doesn't the Earth technically "move"? Equal and opposite sort of thing? It's just that the mass of Earth is so huge in relation to the human that it's negligible? Sorry if I'm missing something...

Terrific forum and post, BTW!
 
  • Like
Likes dometop and berkeman
  • #21
DoctorHoon said:
in classical mechanics, doesn't the Earth technically "move"? Equal and opposite sort of thing? It's just that the mass of Earth is so huge in relation to the human that it's negligible?
Yes, you are right. We are agreeing to neglect that.
 
  • #22
So yes, as @jbriggs444 said we are making the approximation that the Earth is stationary. However, since the Earth is pushed down, the miniscule energy that is transferred across the jumper-Earth contact area would actually flow from the jumper and into the Earth so this would make the misconception even more puzzling. The same analysis applies however and the energy released in the jump starts as internal energy in the jumper’s muscles.

Edit: We are also completely sweeping the entire issue of using other inertial frames under the carpet. Opening that is an entirely different can of worms…
 
  • #23
IIRC, enthusiastic fans jumping up and down in unison at stadia routinely register on nearby seismo' sensors...

Yup, there's definitely energy transfer...

( Don't forget the thunderous 'Thumper' trucks used for geo-surveys... )
 
  • #24
Nik_2213 said:
IIRC, enthusiastic fans jumping up and down in unison at stadia routinely register on nearby seismo' sensors...
Sure, but as mentioned above that transfer is generally into the ground because the floor is not entirely rigid. I also strongly suspect that most of the energy transfer occurs on the landing *thump* rather than at the jumpoff.

Nik_2213 said:
( Don't forget the thunderous 'Thumper' trucks used for geo-surveys... )
We have also all seen Dune … Thumpers can be very useful when dealing with enormous sandworms. 😉
 
  • #25
Think about a spring in outer space that had a device attached to it that used electricity to contract it together. When the spring is contracted, the electrical energy is converted to potential energy, then that's converted to kinetic energy when the spring is released, which leads the spring to be too stretched out, which leads it to contract, etc. So in outer space, a self-contracted spring will oscillate forever (assuming no losses).

Now put this spring against a wall of very large mass. The electrical energy contracts the spring, but now assume that the spring is contracted in a way that keeps it touching the wall with the help of gravity. So when the spring is fully contracted with it's edge on the wall, it begins to stretch out. However, it can't stretch "through" the wall, so it ends up exerting a force on the wall you can work out using Hooke's law (assuming ideal spring). By Newton's Third Law, that force ends up pushing the spring upwards, and if it's large enough, it will overcome the gravity of the wall and launch away.

Now what about conservation of momentum? There is no contradiction here. Throw a ball at a heavy wall, ball goes in one direction, hits wall, changes direction. How does that preserve conservation of momentum? Well the wall is heavy, so the infinitesimal velocity it moves at away from the wall gets multiplied by it's humongous mass and you get a finite quantity that compensates the ball changing direction. Same thing here.
 
  • Like
Likes Delta2
  • #26
The force results in an equal in magnitude but opposite in direction change in momentum of jumper and Earth away from the center mass of Earth and jumper. Due to the Earth being massive, the change in speed of the Earth is extremely tiny, so almost all of energy goes into the jumper.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Delta2
  • #27
rcgldr said:
The insight mentions the jumper's lower body doesn't move,
No it doesn’t. In fact, the point being made is that the lower body extending (although in the example idealised by a spring) is what gives an energy flow into the body from the energy release in the lower body.

Edit: In particular, the Insight explicity states
“Unlike the spring, the jumper’s lower body will have non-zero kinetic energy at the end.”
The zero energy of the spring results from the spring in the example being an idealised massless spring. This is in order to simplify the considerations but does not affect the main point.
 
  • #28
Orodruin said:
“Unlike the spring, the jumper’s lower body will have non-zero kinetic energy at the end.”
I thought I removed that paragraph, but lost an edit. It's fixed now. I'll delete this post later, as it was just to acknowledge your post and that my prior post is now corrected.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Delta2
  • #29
rcgldr said:
The force results in an equal in magnitude but opposite in direction change in momentum of jumper and Earth away from the center mass of Earth and jumper. Due to the Earth being massive, the change in speed of the Earth is extremely tiny, so almost all of energy goes into the jumper.
See #20-#22. The misconception that is being addressed is that the ground not doing work on the jumper would prevent kinetic energy buildup. This misconception is solved by showing how internal energy can be released by parts of the body moving at different velocities. Due to the small motion of the Earth (neglected in the Insight), the energy flow into the Earth is small (and amounts to the ground doing negative work on the jumper).
 
  • Like
Likes FactChecker
  • #30
Interesting article, very nicely written.

But here's a thought: The main target audience is people who actually ask the question posed in the title. I know that when I was at the stage of asking such questions, I would have been scared off if I saw any calculus 😱in the article. I would have engaged more readily with pictures (maybe animated gifs?) and simple pre-calculus explanations.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters

1. How is it possible to jump when the ground does no work?

Jumping is possible due to the conservation of energy. When we jump, our muscles use energy to push us off the ground and into the air. This energy is converted into kinetic energy, which allows us to move upwards. The ground does not do any work because it is not applying a force to us, but rather we are using our own energy to jump.

2. Why does the ground not do any work when we jump?

The ground does not do any work because work is defined as the force applied to an object multiplied by the distance the object moves in the direction of the force. In the case of jumping, there is no force being applied to us by the ground, and therefore no work is being done.

3. Is jumping considered a form of work?

No, jumping is not considered a form of work because it does not involve a force being applied to an object over a distance. Work is only done when a force causes an object to move in the direction of the force.

4. Can we jump without using any energy?

No, it is not possible to jump without using any energy. In order to jump, our muscles must use energy to push us off the ground. Even if we are using a trampoline or other external force to jump, our muscles still use energy to move our bodies.

5. How does gravity affect our ability to jump?

Gravity plays a crucial role in our ability to jump. It is what pulls us back to the ground after we jump, and it also affects the height and duration of our jump. The stronger the gravitational force, the quicker we will fall back to the ground and the lower our jump will be. On the other hand, in environments with weaker gravitational forces, we can jump higher and stay in the air for longer periods of time.

Similar threads

Replies
17
Views
1K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Classical Physics
3
Replies
97
Views
12K
Replies
26
Views
5K
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
9
Views
765
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
29
Views
785
Replies
156
Views
12K
Replies
10
Views
874
Replies
5
Views
794
Back
Top