Why Do Different Kinematic Formulas Yield Varied Results for MJ's Jump?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dooh
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Kinematic
AI Thread Summary
Different kinematic formulas can yield varied results due to the initial conditions and assumptions made in calculations. In this discussion, the time MJ spends in the air is split into ascent and descent, leading to the use of 1.0 seconds for peak height calculations. The first formula yielded an incorrect height due to an improper initial velocity, while the second formula correctly accounted for the final velocity at the peak being zero. Both formulas are valid for uniformly accelerated motion, but accurate input values are crucial for consistent results. The values given for time and height must align with physical laws, suggesting a need for careful verification of assumptions.
Dooh
Messages
41
Reaction score
1
In this problem, it states that Michael Jordan is able to jump and remain in the air for two full seconds from launch to landing. Use that information to calculate the maximun height that such jump would attain. It also says that MJ's jaximum jump height has been estimated at about one meter.

So, the components that were given are:

t = 2.0s
g = 10 m/s² (rounded from 9.8 for simplicity sake)
and we have to calculate y (height)

Since it takes 2 seconds to go up and down, we can assume that the time it takes for MJ to get to the peak of the jump will be 1.0s, therefore we will use:

t = 1.0s instead.

When i tried solving for this problem, i used the formula:

V_f = V_0 + gt --> V_f - gt = V_0 ,

to solve for initial velocity at takeoff, and i got [ V_0 = 2.2 m/s ]

With that, I followed up with the formula:

a) y = (V_0)(t) + ½gt²

and got the answer of: y = -3.8m , which is obviously wrong. So i tried:

b) y = ½(V_0 + V_f)t

and got the answer: y = 1.1m

My questions are:

1) Why do both formulas give different answers when you are using the same set of data to solve for a problem?

2) Why is formula b correct instead of a when gravity plays a role in this yet it was not part of the formula b?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Dooh said:
When i tried solving for this problem, i used the formula:

V_f = V_0 + gt --> V_f - gt = V_0 ,

to solve for initial velocity at takeoff, and i got [ V_0 = 2.2 m/s ]
Your answer is incorrect. V_0 = gt.
1) Why do both formulas give different answers when you are using the same set of data to solve for a problem?
If you used the correct value for V_0, both formulas would give the same answer. Note that formula (b) relies on V_f being zero, but formula (a) does not.


2) Why is formula b correct instead of a when gravity plays a role in this yet it was not part of the formula b?
Both formulas correctly describe uniformly accelerated motion, but they need the proper data as input.

Question: Are the values given for time and height consistent with each other, given what you know about the laws of physics?
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top