The movement of hockey pucks on an air hockey table.

[Drew777]

If an air hockey table is turned on and one end is elevated so the hockey puck slides to the other end freely. Would it take longer for a heavier puck to reach the end of the table before a lighter puck or vice versa?

 

[quietrain]

apparently heavier objects reach the ground faster than light objects assuming no air resistance
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=39234

MacM, I have to admit I don't really understand the last paragraph of your post.

I will use the two forumlas you have given to show that 'closure time' will be shorter for objects of greater mass.

For simplicities sake, let's make up the constants so they are easier to work with:
Earth = 100kg
Bowling ball = 10kg
Soccer ball = 1 kg
Distance (r) = 1m
G = 1 (instead of 6.6742 × 10^−11)

So we have our made up world, Nonceworld.

Force = G. m1.m2 / r^2

Bowling Ball

Force = 1 . 100 . 10 / 1 = 1000 Noncicles of force

F = ma, so a = 1000/10 = 100 m/s^2

Soccer Ball

Force = 1 . 100 . 1 / 1 = 100 Noncicles of force

F = ma, so a = 100/1 = 100 m/s^2

So they accelerate at the same rate towards earth

THE EARTH

OK, this bad boy when placed a metre away from the BB
F = ma, so a = 1000/100 = 10 m/s^2

and from the SB
F = ma, so a = 100/100 = 1 m/s^2

So the Earth accelerates towards the BB faster than towards the SB.

And so the heavier object lands first.

This is Nonceworld, so the figures will be different in the real world but only in scale. And if the objects were dropped at the same time, they would both land at the same time, it's only if dropped seperately that this happens.
Last edited by Blue_UK; 08-03-04 at 08:05 AM..

 

[Drew777]

apparently heavier objects reach the ground faster than light objects assuming no air resistance
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=39234

Was this meant for another thread?

 

[quietrain]

er it should be the same principle right? unless the air hockey is not free fall :(

its been ages since i last touched one.

 

[Drew777]

er it should be the same principle right? unless the air hockey is not free fall :(

its been ages since i last touched one.

Sorry. I was actually referring to the quote you put into the thread. It sounded like it was for someone else. I see why you posted it as an example though.

 

[quietrain]

i don't know about recent agreements , but apparently the agreement is that in vacuum(no air resistance), all objects fall at the same rate

but in the quote i put above, the Earth seems to prefer heavier objects and so heavy= fall faster

 

[KingNothing]

If an air hockey table is turned on and one end is elevated so the hockey puck slides to the other end freely. Would it take longer for a heavier puck to reach the end of the table before a lighter puck or vice versa?

It depends on the size and shape of the pucks. If they are the exact same size and shape, but one is heavier, then it will reach the end faster. The reason is because it will be more aerodynamic relative to its mass.

You can think of it similar to a dropping a bowling ball and a playground ball of the same size and shape, at the same time. The bowling ball will hit the ground first because it cuts through the air better.