Lucy's Stone: A Physics Challenge

  • Thread starter Thread starter calculator20
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Challenge Physics
AI Thread Summary
Lucy throws a stone upwards from a cliff at 15 m/s, reaching a maximum height of 11 m before falling back down. The time for the stone to reach the sea is calculated as 5.8 seconds using the quadratic equation. Alternative methods to find the time include calculating 4.3 seconds for the stone to fall 91 m from its peak and adding 1.5 seconds for the ascent. Another approach involves determining that it takes 3 seconds to return to Lucy's hand and 2.8 seconds to fall the remaining 80 m. The discussion clarifies the calculations and addresses the confusion around the time values.
calculator20
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
Lucy stands on the edge of a vertical cliff and throws a stone vertically upwards. The stone leaves her hand with speed 15m/s at the instant her hand is 80m above the surface of the sea. Air resistance is negligible and the acceleration of free fall is 10m/s/s.

First part is to calculate the maximum height reached which I've done and is 11m.

Second part is to find the time for the stone to reach the sea. I have found the correct answer of 5.8s eventually using the quadratic equation which is fine but quite tricky. This is where my question comes in.

The mark scheme also mentions as an alternative finding 4.3s as the time to fall 91m added to 1.5 for max height or finding 3 to return to hand and then 2.8 to fall 80 m. This is annoying me as I can't see where these answers come from? I assume the 1.5 comes from v/a = 15/10 and that it is doubled for 3 but how are they getting 4.3 and/or 2.8? I've tried every combination of motion equation and I'm sure I'm missing something obvious, please help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
At the top of the trajectory stone doesn't move, so it has to fall 91 m with acceleration g and no initial speed. That yields 4.3 s.

When the stone goes down, once it reaches the cliff level it has exactly the same speed, but opposite direction - so you have a free fall with v0 = 15 m/s (do you know why?) and 80 meters to go. That yields 2.8 s.

Up and down in 3 s is just a free fall with initial speed going up. Going up takes exactly the same time it takes to go down.
 
Borek said:
When the stone goes down, once it reaches the cliff level it has exactly the same speed...
Not the cliff level,the hand level(80 m)
 
adjacent said:
Not the cliff level,the hand level(80 m)

Good point, lousy wording on my side.
 
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 .
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Trying to understand the logic behind adding vectors with an angle between them'
My initial calculation was to subtract V1 from V2 to show that from the perspective of the second aircraft the first one is -300km/h. So i checked with ChatGPT and it said I cant just subtract them because I have an angle between them. So I dont understand the reasoning of it. Like why should a velocity be dependent on an angle? I was thinking about how it would look like if the planes where parallel to each other, and then how it look like if one is turning away and I dont see it. Since...
Back
Top