In 2g, would jumping be harder?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter DaveC426913
  • Start date Start date
DaveC426913
Gold Member
2025 Award
Messages
24,475
Reaction score
8,739
TL;DR
The same effort would get you only half as high. But otherwise would you notice?
Doesn't the whole process scale down?
Let's say in a nice leisurely challenge, I jump a foot. i.e. my feet peak at one foot off the ground.

If I were in 2g and I expended the same effort, I should jump a mere six inches.
Would this be equivalent all aspects?
i.e I wouldn't damage myself any more in the second jump than the first (assuming I don't fall over).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You have to bend your knees then straighten to jump. During that process you would feel like you weigh twice as much as normal (don't skip leg day!). And you would only be in the air for 70% as long as in 1g, which would probably feel odd.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters
DaveC426913 said:
TL;DR: The same effort would get you only half as high. But otherwise would you notice?
Doesn't the whole process scale down?

Would this be equivalent all aspects?

The energy needed to lift mass from zero height to h height (ending up stationary) would be
W=mgh
m=mass
g is gravity and mg is the weight
h is height
That formula tells you that if you double g you will only attain half h which would imply that your "scaling down" would apply

BUT that's in an ideal and theoretical situation and doesn't apply to our body and the physical work we expend.

Your body is not 'ideal' so that formula would not be an exact prediction over a range of conditions. It's too simple a model for human jumpers. We use multiple gears on a bicycle to match the slope of the road to get the best out of your legs. If the W=mgh formula applied all the time , we wouldn't need gears.

There are many studies of how humans perform physical exercise and it's a very complex business.
 
DaveC426913 said:
The same effort would get you only half as high. But otherwise would you notice?
Are you interested in physics or biology?

If physics: I strongly suggest replacing the human with a simple jumping mechanism, and analysing that.

If biology: Human biomechanics is complicated, and asking about perception adds another level of complexity. But if you just ask a yes/no question, then of course you would notice. Even just standing still in 2g would cost you much more energy than in 1g. Probably not just twice as much, but even more, because we are biomechanically optimized for 1g.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 76 ·
3
Replies
76
Views
31K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
4K