Max Acceleration: Body Reaches on Ground

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the maximum acceleration a car can achieve on a flat track using only its engine and tires, with participants debating the limits imposed by friction and gravitational forces. It is generally agreed that under typical conditions, a car's maximum acceleration is limited to gravitational acceleration (g), primarily due to tire friction. However, specialized vehicles like dragsters can exceed this limit with advanced tires and aerodynamic aids, achieving accelerations greater than 1g. The conversation also touches on the role of mechanical engines and the theoretical implications of relativity, though these points are deemed largely irrelevant to practical acceleration in cars. Ultimately, the consensus highlights that while there are limits to acceleration based on friction and design, exceptional cases exist that can push these boundaries.
  • #31
Stingray said:
:confused: The third response is where it was clarified that the question specifically referred to cars.
Pervect was right; the guy's flame-baiting. Let's just ignore him.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
I don't even know what flame baiting is. The question although referring to a car, does not refer to a normal car, not only that, but he asks about limits. And, As I stated before, the only limits that a MECHANICAL engine would have, would be due to relativity. Normal cars reach more than one g right now. You should watch racing sometime. Well, Normal if you are speaking about a racecar, which I assume you are.
 
  • #33
memarf1 said:
the only limits that a MECHANICAL engine would have, would be due to relativity.
So once you've made this engine out of neutronium so it won't explode at several million rpm... you're going to fuel it with antimatter to get that much mass reciprocating?

memarf1 said:
You should watch racing sometime.
We've not only watched it; we've done it. And apparently Stingray is still doing it.

And if you really don't know what flame-baiting is, just look back over your last couple of posts for examples thereof. It's aguing (usually impolitely) just for the sake of pissing people off even when you know that you're wrong in hopes that a war will start.
 
  • #34
nemarf1, your posts appear overly argumentative. Ie, like Danger said, long before Einstein even comes into the picture, Newton will tear the engine apart. That makes Relativity far from relevant here. The other posters here were simply trying to constrain the thread to the limits of physical reality.

So that's enough of the bickering, guys...
 
  • #35
Russ, by your definition Relitivity would never play a part. If we ever hope to travel at speeds close to the speed of light we will have to use mechanical engines which will not tear themselves apart. Not only that but in space we will have to find a way to eliminate the heat emmitted by the friction inside the engine or our ship will simply melt.

No, Relativity is the only limit we have to talk about here, if we can use a fusion powered engine as proposed above, for this super racecar.

Conventional means that we use today without using rocket engines are wind limited to answer the original question based on a normal racecar without being confrontational.

However, I still say that Relativity is the only limiting factor if you are asking about a super racecar powered by something we don't fully understand yet.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
896
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
671
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
5K