Question about gravity, water and snow

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rafael toledo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gravity Water
AI Thread Summary
Falling from a mountain onto powder snow is generally considered to hurt less than falling into water due to snow's ability to compress and trap air, reducing impact force. The type of fall, height, and body orientation during the fall significantly influence the outcome. Water poses a greater risk due to its incompressibility, leading to severe acceleration upon impact, and the danger of drowning if unconscious. Historical cases of survival from great heights often involve landing on snow or similar materials, not water. Overall, snow is viewed as a safer landing option compared to water.
Rafael toledo
Suppose I fell from a mountain, which would hurt less:

A) Falling on a very huge pile of powder snow or
B) Falling on water

It's a serious questions! Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Rafael. I'm guessing that A would hurt less because snow (at least certain types of snow) typically has air trapped in it and is able to be compressed. It also doesn't present a sudden, drastic change in density like moving from air to water does. But that's mostly a guess on my part.
 
  • Like
Likes davenn
Hi Rafael:

I believe the answer depends on some unstated assumptions. The following are some examples.

What do you mean by "fall off a mountain"? Is your fall off a cliff through the air, or are you sliding down a steep slope of the mountain? How high is the mountain, or more relevant, how far vertically do you fall? Can you control your orientation so that you fall with your body horizontal until you are near the water/snow (to minimize your velocity when you hit the water/snow), and then reorient your body so you enter the water/snow feet first with slightly bent knees (to minimize injuries)? What are you wearing? Assuming the fall itself does not cause serious injuries, you will likely end up deep in the water/snow, so what will you do to avoid drowning/suffocating in the water/snow? Perhaps you have a breathing device and an air supply with you. In that case, if you are in water, then perhaps you can swim to the surface and survive. If you are in snow, how will you get to the surface before your air supply is exhausted or you freeze to death?

Good luck with your story.

Regards,
Buzz
 
Rafael toledo said:
Suppose I fell from a mountain, which would hurt less:

A) Falling on a very huge pile of powder snow or
B) Falling on water

It's a serious questions! Thanks!
The recorded cases of people surviving falls from very great heights (a mile or more) generally involve snow, trees, glass ceilings or something similar to cushion the impact. None of those cases involve landing in water.

The problem with landing in water is two-fold. First, water is largely incompressible. A high speed impact will involve very large accelerations. Second, after the impact renders you unconscious, water can drown you.

The recorded cases of survival have typically involved a witnessed fall with prompt aid rendered.
 
  • Like
Likes Buzz Bloom and russ_watters
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top