B Solve My Train Dilemma: Can I Jump High Enough?

[Einstein60]

Assuming I'm in a train moving at a very high speed. According to Newton if I jump up, I must land at the same place. But what if I had the aptitude/ability to jump very very high, will I be moving in the air and land at the same place.

 

[Zeeshan Ahmad]

I think up till when we are confined with in the train as a frame of reference this will apply but when we become free from the bounding of this frame of reference no longer we will be the Rule(bounding) of this frame will apply
So I think we will jump back at some places other then from which we previously jumped from

 

[Einstein60]

I think up till when we are confined with in the train as a frame of reference this will apply but when we become free from the bounding of this frame of reference no longer we will be the Rule(bounding) of this frame will apply
So I think we will jump back at some places other then from which we previously jumped from

Please I don't
Understand

 

[hmmm27]

Assuming I'm in a train moving at a very high speed. According to Newton if I jump up, I must land at the same place. But what if I had the aptitude/ability to jump very very high, will I be moving in the air and land at the same place.

Why would you not land in the same place ?

 

[jbriggs444]

I think up till when we are confined with in the train as a frame of reference this will apply but when we become free from the bounding of this frame of reference no longer we will be the Rule(bounding) of this frame will apply

This is not correct. A frame of reference is not a tangible physical thing. At the level of sophistication of first year physics, a frame of reference can be thought of as a coordinate system (*). It is something that you conjure up with a pencil and paper. Thus it can have no physical effects whatsoever.

For an object to be "in" a frame of reference only means that it has coordinates relative to that frame.

(*) More technically, a frame of reference in first year physics stops a bit short of being a full blown coordinate system. It only establishes a standard of rest. One can then pick an origin and lay down a coordinate system (Cartesian, polar or whatever) using that standard of rest.

 

[Zeeshan Ahmad]

This is not correct. A frame of reference is not a tangible physical thing. At the level of sophistication of first year

Here frame of reference to my understanding is the object or thing to which comparative we are considering the motion
It is just only not a pancel drawing

Same in first year physics their is given the example of a bus which is moving we you present inside with one frame of reference we are in motion (surrounding of the bus) and other we are at rest (set or passenger in the bus)

 

[jbriggs444]

Here frame of reference to my understanding is the object or thing to which comparative we are considering the motion
It is just only not a pancel drawing.

Not so. All objects are in all frames of reference at all times.

Which one we use is a free choice. We can make that choice after the fact, when we put pencil to paper and begin analyzing the scenario. In the case at hand, we can consider our man jumping on the train from a frame of reference anchored to the tracks, from a frame of reference anchored to the train or from a frame of reference anchored to a vulture circling overhead.

It is convenient to adopt a frame of reference anchored to the train since the intent of the question is that "in the same place" means "in the same place relative to the train".

 

[Ibix]

Same in first year physics their is given the example of a bus which is moving we you present inside with one frame of reference we are in motion (surrounding of the bus) and other we are at rest (set or passenger in the bus)

This is often sloppily presented as "the people in the bus are in frame A and the people outside are in frame B", but that is wrong. The correct statements would be "the people in the bus are at rest in frame A and the people outside are moving in frame A", and "the people in the bus are moving in frame B and the people outside are at rest in frame B". As @jbriggs444 says, everything is in all frames and nobody is obligated to use their rest frame (for example, if you are on the bus you will ask "when do we arrive at my stop", tacitly adopting a frame where the bus is moving, and not "when does my stop arrive at the bus").

 

[Zeeshan Ahmad]

Ok thank for guidance

This is often sloppily presented as "the people in the bus are in frame A and the people outside are in frame B", but that is wrong. The correct statements would be "the people in the bus are at rest in frame A and the people outside are moving in frame A", and "the people in the bus are moving in frame B and the people outside are at rest in frame B". As @jbriggs444 says, everything is in all frames and nobody is obligated to use their rest frame (for example, if you are on the bus you will ask "when do we arrive at my stop", tacitly adopting a frame where the bus is moving, and not "when doe

 

[Baluncore]

Assuming I'm in a train moving at a very high speed. According to Newton if I jump up, I must land at the same place. But what if I had the aptitude/ability to jump very very high, will I be moving in the air and land at the same place.

Inside the train, the atmosphere is moving with the train. You will return to the same place you jumped from if you stay inside the train. You remained inside the train FoR.

If you jump vertically out of the train, into the apparent headwind of the atmosphere, you will be accelerated backwards by atmospheric drag, and so land towards the back of the train.
You have three FoR, the train, the atmosphere, then the train again. You will fall over backwards when you land because you are traveling backwards relative to the faster train.

 

[Zeeshan Ahmad]

If you jump vertically out of the train, into the apparent headwind of the atmosphere, you will be accelerated backwards by atmospheric drag, and so land towards the back of the train.
You have three FoR, the train, the atmosphere, then the train again. You will fall over backwards when you land because you are traveling backwards relative to the faster train

Yes to the same context I have explained but the term (frame of reference) have taken the the discussion out of context