Mass doesn not effect speed of dropped objects

  • Thread starter JeepinBob
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Mass Speed
In summary, Galileo proved that objects of different masses fall at the same rate due to the force of gravity being a function of mass and distance. This is determined by the universal law of gravitation and can be seen by equating the forces acting on the two objects. However, in practical experiments, air resistance may affect the time it takes for objects to reach the ground due to their different sizes and masses. Ultimately, this all depends on the relative mass and acceleration of the objects.
  • #1
JeepinBob
4
0
Okay I am no physics pro, but Galileo claimed/proved that two objects of differing mass will fall at the same rate/speed.

As I understand the force of gravity is a function of mass and distance. There is gravitational pull between all objects and this force is determined by the mass of the objects and their distance from each other.

If I understand this then gravitational pull would be greater on an object of greater mass. Now I can see why Galileo's tests showed no difference as the the difference in mass of any two objects he tested would be insignificant compared to the mass of the earth.

What am I missing here?

Thanks for your help and please don't get too technical.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You need to be careful about which mass you're talking about. Also, it's the acceleration that is the same, not the speed. Although if both objects are dropped with the same speed, then they will continue to have the same speeds (although both speeds are constantly increasing) through their falls. The force a mass [tex]m_1[/tex], for example the Earth, exerts on a second mass, [tex]m_2[/tex], say for example a person, due to gravity is given by [tex]F = \frac{Gm_1m_2}{r^2}[/tex]. However, the force acting on an object is [tex]F = ma[/tex] so for the person, [tex]m_1[/tex], you can equate the forces, [tex]F = m_1a = \frac{Gm_1m_2}{r^2}[/tex] and you'll see that the acceleration depends only on the mass of the other object and the distance between them.

As you can see, however, this works no matter what the scale of the objects. You can say instead of looking at the person, you look at the force the person exerts on the planet! Using the same equation, you see that it also gives an acceleration independent of it's own mass.
 
  • #3
It is true that the acceleration of an object in Earth free-fall is determined solely by the mass of the Earth and not by the mass of the object. It's a fact. However, you should keep in mind that the Earth is also accelerated by the object. Their relative acceleration is the product of their masses as shown in the universal law of gravitation.

edit:
If you increase the mass of the falling object then the acceleration of the Earth will increase, but not the acceleration of the object itself. Obviously, as you've already pointed out, this increase would be undetectable (unless we're talking about an astronomical size object).
 
Last edited:
  • #4
Turtle, I do understand and agree with what you said. Pengwuino, can you tell me what all the letters represent? What are G r and a? I got F and m1 and m2. I will probably have further questions.
 
  • #5
G is a constant, r is a distance between two masses and a is acceleration.
 
  • #6
Turtle, it is best not to confuse the OP with something that is a secondary issue.

JeepinBob: If you look at the gravitational force equation that Penguino posted, you can see that the force of gravity scales linearly with the mass of your small object (m1). In other words, if you double the mass, you double the force. But then you plug them into f=ma and you find that if you double the force and double the mass, the acceleration stays the same.
 
  • #7
Now I can see why Galileo's tests showed no difference as the the difference in mass of any two objects he tested would be insignificant compared to the mass of the earth.

You did not state the relationship correctly: Objects of different masses accelerate at the same rate in a particular gravitational field. Any object will accelerate in a gravitational field at the same rate, regardless of the mass of the object. This has nothing to do with the relative mass of Earth and relatively small masses. All masses accelerate at about g = 9.8 m/s/s at the Earth's surface. If one mass is twice another, it is subject to twice the gravitational force resultring in the same acceleration g.
 
  • #8
russ_watters said:
Turtle, it is best not to confuse the OP with something that is a secondary issue.
Sorry, I wanted to be "not too technical" as the op requested. But I guess I did not understand the question.

JeepinBob, this page has helped me.
http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/history/Newtongrav.html
 
  • #9
It might also be helpful to add that, while the acceleration due to gravity is equal on both masses, galileo would probably not have seen both masses hit the ground at exactly the same time - no matter how careful he was to drop both masses from the same height and time.

This is because of air resistance. You might think that air resistance is equal on both masses, but this isn't exactly so. Galileo used larger objects for the heavy mass, and smaller objects for the small mass. Their sizes are different. This means that more air is bombarding the larger object (resistance is a force that counteracts the force of the object due to gravity). But contrastingly, the larger object also has a higher mass and thus higher force due to [itex]F=ma[/itex]. Eventually, as the object keeps increasing speed, the air resistance force will keep increasing until the force due to gravity (which is constant as the mass and acceleration of gravity are constant) will be equal to each other. This is when the net force (total sum of forces - gravity and air) is 0 and thus there is no more acceleration. Then the object experiences a constant speed and this is what is meant by terminal velocity.

Now, you'll probably find that even though the larger object experiences more air resistance, the increased mass is still more profound and thus the large object will have a high terminal velocity. So, if you drop the two objects from a very high location at the same time, the larger one will hit the ground first (the higher the tower, the bigger the difference).
 
  • #10
So if I understand correctly, the force of pulling on the heavier object would be greater but the added mass counters the force. that is the same force on a heavier object would cause less acceleration.
 
  • #11
JeepinBob said:
So if I understand correctly, the force of pulling on the heavier object would be greater but the added mass counters the force. that is the same force on a heavier object would cause less acceleration.
Exactly, an object that is twice as heavy feels twice as much gravitational force, but it also takes twice as much force to accelerate it.
 
  • #12
I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to say simply because of the lack of terminology.
JeepinBob said:
the force of pulling on the heavier object

Do you mean the air resistance force, or gravity force here?

Anyway, I'll try explain it with example. Imagine you have two spheres (I'll refrain from using the term balls :smile:) and each sphere is the same size. However, the only difference is that one sphere is twice as heavy as the other (one sphere could be hollow).
Now, looking at the equation F=ma, the acceleration is gravity and this is the same for all objects, but the only difference here is the mass. The heavier ball will have twice the constant force compared to the other.

Since the two spheres are the same size, the air resistance that acts on them is also equal. As we drop both spheres from a large height, the accelerate (keep speeding up) and as their speed increases, the air resistance force which tries to counter-act the force of the spheres gets larger too. At some point, the air resistance force will become equal to the force of the lighter sphere. This means there is no more force being applied so no more acceleration. The speed of the lighter sphere is now constant and the air resistance force doesn't change anymore.

There is still the force of gravity acting, but the air resistance is also acting so no acceleration.
The twice as heavy sphere still has a larger gravity force so it continues to accelerate until the air resistance also becomes twice as much.
Now, as you can probably visualize, the heavier sphere would hit the ground first because it manages to get to a greater speed and keep that higher speed.


But, the heavier objects aren't always the first to hit the ground. Think of a man in a parachute versus an apple.
 
  • #13
Oh I understand what you meant now after seeing mgb_phys' response.
 
  • #14
JeepinBob said:
Okay I am no physics pro, but Galileo claimed/proved that two objects of differing mass will fall at the same rate/speed.


That's right. All objects are accelerated toward the Earth at the same rate, regardless of diameter.


JeepinBob said:
Galileo's tests showed no difference as the the difference in mass of any two objects he tested would be insignificant compared to the mass of the earth.


There would not be any difference even if the masses he used were greater than those of the earth. Regardless of the mass of the object, the acceleration imparted to it by the gravity of the Earth is still the same. The mass is the factor that determines the amount of momentum-changing force that the object experiences. Shape is also a factor when calculating for air resistance. But in freefall all objects can be treated as having equivalent masses. This means that if there were no air to provide resistance, a feather would fall at the same rate as a bowling ball.
 
  • #15
mgb_phys said:
Exactly, an object that is twice as heavy feels twice as much gravitational force, but it also takes twice as much force to accelerate it.


Why would an object that is twice as heavy feel twice as much gravitational force? I think what you mean is that a heavy object exerts more gravitational force than a lighter one.
 
  • #16
ernestpworrel said:
Why would an object that is twice as heavy feel twice as much gravitational force? I think what you mean is that a heavy object exerts more gravitational force than a lighter one.

That's how gravity works, it's been explained at least a couple times in this thread. On Earth, an object, A, that is twice as heavy as another object, B, will feel twice the gravitational force from the Earth as object B.
 
  • #17
Mentallic said:
This means there is no more force being applied so no more acceleration. The speed of the lighter sphere is now constant and the air resistance force doesn't change anymore.

There is still the force of gravity acting, but the air resistance is also acting so no acceleration.

There would still be acceleration, wouldn't there? Just no net force?
 
Last edited:
  • #18
ernestpworrel said:
There would still be acceleration, wouldn't there? Just no net force?

There's still two forces involved, but they exactly cancel at terminal velocity, giving a 0 net force. That means there is 0 acceleration: F = ma.
 
  • #19
Pengwuino said:
That's how gravity works, it's been explained at least a couple times in this thread. On Earth, an object, A, that is twice as heavy as another object, B, will feel twice the gravitational force from the Earth as object B.


Only when it's on the surface though. There's no heavy or light in freefall conditions.
 
Last edited:
  • #20
Pengwuino said:
There's still two forces involved, but they exactly cancel at terminal velocity, giving a 0 net force. That means there is 0 acceleration: F = ma.


So air resistance changes gravitational acceleration?
 
  • #21
ernestpworrel said:
Why would an object that is twice as heavy feel twice as much gravitational force? I think what you mean is that a heavy object exerts more gravitational force than a lighter one.

Remember, F=m*dp\dt. You double the mass, you double the force. The gravitational field (ie. the interaction of said mass with other masses) is indepedent of the mass of the other objects. The interaction that another mass receive from your field (your interaction) is proportionnal to its mass. Bad analogy: Imagine a bully and a nerd. They have a certain strenght. The bully hit the nerd. His "hitting force" is independent of the nerd, he would hit with the same strenght on something else. But the pain the nerd receive is dependent of his strenght. If he's slim, he'll get hit hard. Maybe that was a morally bad exemple, but that get the point done. The "hitting force" of a mass is it's gravitational field, it's ability to interact with your mass, the "pain" it does on you is the force, the effect it have on you, namely, an acceleration.
 
  • #22
ernestpworrel said:
Only when it's on the surface though. There's no heavy or light in freefall conditions.

No, it feels the same force anywhere. Having a "weight" is not the same as feeling an acceleration. Imagine you have a ball bearing and you drop it out of an airplane. Let's say you also have a ball bearing sized sample of... neutron star matter, something undeniably dense and massive. Now, if they are indeed feeling the same force, by F = ma, the neutron star matter wouldn't pretty much not even budge compared to the ball bearing since the mass of the neutral star bearing is far far greater.

ernestpworrel said:
So air resistance changes gravitational acceleration?

No, it's its own force. It simply acts in the opposite direction of the gravitational force if the object if moving strictly in the direction of the gravitational force. Now, if you shot a ball horizontally, it will feel a horizontal resistance that has nothing to do with the vertical resistance.
 
  • #23
But you're agreeing with me, british.
 
  • #24
ernestpworrel said:
But you're agreeing with me, british.

Mmh, about what? I only made a particular comment about a particular post!
 
  • #25
Pengwuino said:
No, it feels the same force anywhere. Having a "weight" is not the same as feeling an acceleration. Imagine you have a ball bearing and you drop it out of an airplane. Let's say you also have a ball bearing sized sample of... neutron star matter, something undeniably dense and massive. Now, if they are indeed feeling the same force, by F = ma, the neutron star matter wouldn't pretty much not even budge compared to the ball bearing since the mass of the neutral star bearing is far far greater.

But the ball bearing and the lump of neutron star matter would still be influenced by the same amount of gravitational force and would both be accelerated at the same rate. I know the equation F=ma but I'm just saying that that doesn't mean that a heavier object will feel a greater or lesser gravitational force.
 
  • #26
Okay forget my posts, I'm sleepy and little bit drunk:tongue:
 
  • #27
_DJ_british_? said:
Mmh, about what? I only made a particular comment about a particular post!


Well then, excuse me. I thought you were trying to debate me.
 
  • #28
ernestpworrel said:
I know the equation F=ma but I'm just saying that that doesn't mean that a heavier object will feel a greater or lesser gravitational force.

Hum, yes it does. if we asssume g(vector) (the g-field) the be constant), the g-force can be expressed as m*g(vector).
 
  • #29
ernestpworrel said:
But the ball bearing and the lump of neutron star matter would still be influenced by the same amount of gravitational force and would both be accelerated at the same rate. I know the equation F=ma but I'm just saying that that doesn't mean that a heavier object will feel a greater or lesser gravitational force.

It HAS to feel a greater gravitational force. If you assume they both have the same acceleration, but vastly different masses, they MUST have vastly different accelerations. Since we know more massive and less massive objects fall with the same acceleration, they must feel different forces.
 
  • #30
Near the surface of the earth, mases have the same acceleration, which is F\m. That ratio is approximately 9.8 m\s2. Now imagine: If F augment, how m change? And if m change, how F change?
 
  • #31
Pengwuino's post resume what I'm saying.
 
  • #32
I think you're interchanging field and force, which are VERY different thing
 
  • #33
_DJ_british_? said:
Hum, yes it does. if we asssume g(vector) (the g-field) the be constant), the g-force can be expressed as m*g(vector).


A lump of star matter might move slower in the gravitational field of the Earth than a simple ball bearing. That doesn't automatically mean it feels less force though.
 
  • #34
Thanks guys. the world makes sense once again and I feel just a little bit smarter.
 
  • #35
Pengwuino said:
It HAS to feel a greater gravitational force. If you assume they both have the same acceleration, but vastly different masses, they MUST have vastly different accelerations. Since we know more massive and less massive objects fall with the same acceleration, they must feel different forces.


But the lump of star matter exerts a greater gravitational force on the Earth than the ball bearing, so the total gravitational force is greater. That still doesn't mean it feels a greater force though. It's the equivalent of a greater force so the vector fields are different, but the gravitational force of the Earth is constant so there's no real difference in forces.
 
<h2>1. How is it possible that the mass of an object does not affect its speed when dropped?</h2><p>According to the law of gravity, all objects fall at the same rate regardless of their mass. This means that the acceleration due to gravity is the same for all objects, and therefore their speed will also be the same when dropped from the same height.</p><h2>2. Why do heavier objects appear to fall faster than lighter objects?</h2><p>This is a common misconception, as heavier objects do not actually fall faster than lighter objects. The reason they may appear to do so is because of air resistance. Heavier objects have more mass and therefore more surface area, which increases air resistance and makes it seem like they are falling faster. However, in a vacuum where there is no air resistance, all objects would fall at the same rate.</p><h2>3. Does air resistance have any effect on the speed of falling objects?</h2><p>Yes, air resistance can affect the speed of falling objects. As mentioned before, it can make heavier objects appear to fall faster due to the increased surface area. It can also slow down the speed of lighter objects, as they have less mass and therefore less resistance to air. However, in a vacuum, air resistance is not a factor and all objects would fall at the same rate.</p><h2>4. What other factors can affect the speed of a falling object?</h2><p>The main factor that affects the speed of a falling object is the height from which it is dropped. The higher the object is dropped from, the longer it has to accelerate and the faster it will fall. Other factors that can have a minor effect include the shape and density of the object, as well as air pressure and temperature.</p><h2>5. Does the mass of an object have any impact on its acceleration when dropped?</h2><p>No, the mass of an object does not affect its acceleration when dropped. As stated before, all objects experience the same acceleration due to gravity regardless of their mass. This is why objects of different masses will reach the ground at the same time when dropped from the same height.</p>

1. How is it possible that the mass of an object does not affect its speed when dropped?

According to the law of gravity, all objects fall at the same rate regardless of their mass. This means that the acceleration due to gravity is the same for all objects, and therefore their speed will also be the same when dropped from the same height.

2. Why do heavier objects appear to fall faster than lighter objects?

This is a common misconception, as heavier objects do not actually fall faster than lighter objects. The reason they may appear to do so is because of air resistance. Heavier objects have more mass and therefore more surface area, which increases air resistance and makes it seem like they are falling faster. However, in a vacuum where there is no air resistance, all objects would fall at the same rate.

3. Does air resistance have any effect on the speed of falling objects?

Yes, air resistance can affect the speed of falling objects. As mentioned before, it can make heavier objects appear to fall faster due to the increased surface area. It can also slow down the speed of lighter objects, as they have less mass and therefore less resistance to air. However, in a vacuum, air resistance is not a factor and all objects would fall at the same rate.

4. What other factors can affect the speed of a falling object?

The main factor that affects the speed of a falling object is the height from which it is dropped. The higher the object is dropped from, the longer it has to accelerate and the faster it will fall. Other factors that can have a minor effect include the shape and density of the object, as well as air pressure and temperature.

5. Does the mass of an object have any impact on its acceleration when dropped?

No, the mass of an object does not affect its acceleration when dropped. As stated before, all objects experience the same acceleration due to gravity regardless of their mass. This is why objects of different masses will reach the ground at the same time when dropped from the same height.

Similar threads

  • Mechanics
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
787
Replies
34
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
876
Replies
30
Views
4K
Replies
12
Views
1K
Replies
17
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Back
Top