Throw Snowball from Car for Maximum Force: Physics Explained

  • Thread starter Thread starter Orion7
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Car
AI Thread Summary
When a snowball is thrown from a moving car, its speed upon impact is the sum of the car's speed and the throw's speed relative to the car. This is explained by Newton's First Law of Motion, which states that an object in motion continues at a constant velocity unless acted upon by an external force. Thus, if a snowball is thrown from a car traveling at 50 km/h, it retains that speed, hitting a target with proportional force. The discussion highlights the importance of properly framing physics problems to avoid confusion about the dynamics involved. Understanding these principles can clarify how motion and force interact in real-world scenarios.
Orion7
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi there.

Hopefully I'm posting this in the correct place. I took a look at the guidelines and decided not to post in the general physics forum as this question does seem homework-like, though it's not exactly homework. Just a general physics question if that's alright. If this is the incorrect place to post this question then please tell me so I'll know not to do so in the future.

My physics teacher mentioned that if you wanted to throw a snowball at someone in order to hit them with as much force as possible (he said this jokingly and told us not to actually try it out) that you could get inside of a car and throw a snowball out towards your target (such as a person or whatever it may be) as the speed at which the snowball traveled would be equal to the speed at which the car was also traveling.

For example: I'm inside of a car traveling 50 km/h, and I decide to throw a snowball out of that car towards a tree. The snowball would also be traveling at 50 km/h, and thus it would hit the tree with force proportional to the speed it was traveling at.

Now our physics teacher didn't explain why this would happen, and I searched on Google for possible answers, but to no avail.

Could anyone explain the physics behind this? I find the idea interesting and it's been on my mind for the past few days.

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Huh. Looks like it was moved to general physics anyways.
 
Both you and the snowball accelerated with the car relative to the tree. So when you toss the snowball out the window, it is still going at 50 km/h.
 
For the same reason that if you jump out of a moving car you get hurt. If it weren't like that. You could jump out of cars and nothing would happen to you.
 
Orion7 said:
For example: I'm inside of a car traveling 50 km/h, and I decide to throw a snowball out of that car towards a tree. The snowball would also be traveling at 50 km/h, and thus it would hit the tree with force proportional to the speed it was traveling at.

Now our physics teacher didn't explain why this would happen, and I searched on Google for possible answers, but to no avail.

Could anyone explain the physics behind this? I find the idea interesting and it's been on my mind for the past few days.

Thanks.
If you want the physics explanation, it's Newton's First Law of Motion:

"An object either remains at rest or continues to move at a constant velocity, unless acted upon by an external force."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_laws_of_motion
 
The speed with which the snowball hits the tree depends on the force and angle towards the tree with which you throw it. For example, your very poorly stated problem does not prohibit a solution where the throw the snowball out of the car at 51mph back towards the tree after you have passed it and it hits the tree at 1mph. OR, you could throw the snowball out of the car at 10mph directly towards an oncoming tree and hit the tree at 60 mph.

A proper statement (that I think your prof was making) is that you toss the snowball out of the car with zero forward velocity relative to the car but outwards towards the tree.

It's common to use that kind of poorly stated problem to demonstrate the basics but the fact that it is common does not make it a good idea.
 
  • Like
Likes sophiecentaur
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...
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?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top