How high can a high jumper clear on the moon compared to on Earth?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimmy87
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Jump Physics
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a physics problem comparing the height a high jumper can clear on the moon versus on Earth, given the different gravitational accelerations. The original poster attempts to equate gravitational potential energy on both celestial bodies to determine the height achievable on the moon.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the original poster's approach of equating gravitational potential energy and question the assumption regarding the height of the center of mass (COM) during the jump. There is also a focus on estimating the COM height and its implications for the problem.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different interpretations of the problem and the assumptions involved. Some guidance has been offered regarding the estimation of the COM height, but there is no explicit consensus on how to approach the problem fully.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the exam question does not clarify that the 1m COM height is an estimate, leading to confusion. There is also mention of the high jumper's technique, which may affect the interpretation of the problem.

Jimmy87
Messages
692
Reaction score
19

Homework Statement


If a high jumper can clear a 2m bar on Earth, how high is the bar he can clear on the moon assuming it is done under the same conditions as on the Earth. Acceleration due to gravity on the moon is 1.7 m/s^2.

Homework Equations


GPE = mgh

The Attempt at a Solution


I set mgh on Earth equal to mgh on the moon as the athlete exerts the same starting energy transfer. I got a factor of 5.8 giving the bar on the moon at 11.6m. However, the mark scheme says the athlete lifts his COM 1m on Earth. I have no idea how you are suppose to know this? I get that the COM goes under the bar but what makes it half the height of the bar? This is a proper past exam question and what I have put in the question is all they give you! Please help. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Jimmy87 said:
However, the mark scheme says the athlete lifts his COM 1m on Earth. I have no idea how you are suppose to know this?
Good question! Perhaps you supposed to 'estimate' the height of the athlete's COM as being about 1 m off the ground when he leaves the ground. (Not cool for an exam question, unless it's free response and any reasonable estimate is OK.)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jimmy87
Doc Al said:
Good question! Perhaps you supposed to 'estimate' the height of the athlete's COM as being about 1 m off the ground when he leaves the ground. (Not cool for an exam question, unless it's free response and any reasonable estimate is OK.)
Phew! Glad I wasn't missing something. I have attached the paper and mark scheme - it's question 3b (ii). It doesn't even say the 1m COM is an estimate - it states it as though it is a fact! Thanks
 

Attachments

Jimmy87 said:
Phew! Glad I wasn't missing something. I have attached the paper and mark scheme - it's question 3b (ii). It doesn't even say the 1m COM is an estimate - it states it as though it is a fact!
Read the question exactly as written in the document you posted. It's a bit sneaky, but you actually have all the info you need -- since the question gives you the answer!
 
Jimmy87 said:
the mark scheme says the athlete lifts his COM 1m on Earth
This is a common blunder.
A high jumper does not arrive at the bar in a vertical position then jump. Would not go very high that way.
The jump starts with a run up. Approaching the bar, the jumper leans back and bends the legs. A combination of the forward momentum and leg extension from that low position produces the upward velocity needed. So the mass centre has to lifted from rather lower than 1m.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jimmy87

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
6K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K