Off the cliff with velocity and gravity

  • Thread starter Thread starter rupz28
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gravity Velocity
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a physics problem involving deceleration and free fall. The initial scenario presents a vehicle needing to reduce its speed from 180.7 km/h to 80 km/h within 10 seconds while decelerating at 20,000 km/h². Calculations show the final velocity would be 140.7 km/h, indicating the vehicle would not slow down enough before reaching the curve. The second part addresses the time it takes to fall from a 3000m cliff under gravity's acceleration, where incorrect equations and missing factors lead to confusion about the fall time. The correct approach emphasizes the need for proper equations and the square root in calculations to determine the accurate time of descent.
rupz28
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


You slam on the brakes and begin decelerating at 20,000 km/h2! The curve sign said you have to be down to 80 km/h before you hit the curve or you'll go over the cliff. You have 10 seconds until you reach the curve. Is your final velocity going to be down to 80 km/h by the time you reach the curve?

The current speed is 180.7 km/hr

Homework Equations


If a = fv-sv/t then solving for final velocity is fv = a(t) + sv


The Attempt at a Solution


divide the number of seconds by 3600 to get the number of hours = 0.002hr

fv = -20,000 km/h2(0.002h) + 180.7 km/h

= 140.7km/h or is it 140.7 km/h2



Homework Statement


So, you go over the edge. This is it, you are dead! The cliff you just fell off is 3000m high. At gravity's 9.8 m/s2 acceleration, how many seconds do you have until you meet your doom?


Homework Equations


a= d/t2


The Attempt at a Solution


d = 3000m
a = 9.8 m/s2

I guess need to isolate t2 first, to get t2 = d/a, so t2 = 3000m/9.8m/s2

3000m/9.8m/s2 = 306 seconds? this doesn't seem correct, seems like it would take too long to hit the bottom

Thanks for all help
 
Physics news on Phys.org
3000 meters, 3 kilometers, is almost 2 miles high! You think it wouldn't take about 3 minutes to fall 2 miles?
 
No, it wouldn't.

First, you're missing a factor of two in your equation to find fall time, and second, you're forgetting a square root. You had the proportionality correct (as t2 is proportional to d), but you are completely forgetting about the fact that t is squared in your final answer.
 
Ok, so I did the problem correct, but I'm not "seeing" the end result as a logical answer is what you are saying??
 
No, you did the problem incorrectly.

First, your equation is wrong. Where did you get the equation that a = d/t2?

(Specifically, it's missing a factor of 2)

Second, near the end, you state that t2 is equal to 3000 m / (9.8 m/s2). However, you then solve it and say t = 3000/9.8. You dropped the exponent.
 
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