The discussion centers around the time of flight of objects in air compared to a vacuum, exploring the effects of air resistance and various conditions affecting motion. Participants consider different scenarios, including vertical throws and the influence of object characteristics.
Participants express differing views on how air resistance affects time of flight, with no consensus reached on the implications of specific conditions or object types.
Participants highlight the importance of object characteristics and motion conditions, indicating that the discussion is limited by the lack of specific details regarding the objects in question.
Asad Raza said:I reckon that the time should decrease as the height approached (of a vertically thrown object for instance) decreases
Details matter. Is the object at rest, falling or rising? Does it have a spin? What about its horizontal velocity? What about its shape?Asad Raza said:Oh yes! If we consider two similar heights in the journey of an object in space and atmosphere. The one in the atmosphere will take more time, I guess, since it has to sail through air drag. Right?
russ_watters said:Am I missing something here? I see no description at all about what kind of objects we're discussing and what is making them move. It matters a lot if we're talking about a bowling ball or a glider, for example.
Take, for instance, the case of a piece of [indestructible] paper hurled upward at escape velocity. It takes longer to hit ground in vacuum than in air.Drakkith said:Unless the question is about throwing something with a rocket engine, I don't see how any of that matters since we're talking about vacuum vs non vacuum. Seems pretty clear cut to me.
If you drive a golf ball or throw a paper airplane in a vacuum it will come down faster than if you do it in air... unless it has topspin or is flying upside-down in which case it may generate negative lift and fall much faster than when either creating positive lift or thrown in a vacuum.Drakkith said:Unless the question is about throwing something with a rocket engine, I don't see how any of that matters since we're talking about vacuum vs non vacuum. Seems pretty clear cut to me.
jbriggs444 said:Take, for instance, the case of a piece of [indestructible] paper hurled upward at escape velocity. It takes longer to hit ground in vacuum than in air.
russ_watters said:If you drive a golf ball or throw a paper airplane in a vacuum it will come down faster than if you do it in air... unless it has topspin or is flying upside-down in which case it may generate negative lift and fall much faster than when either creating positive lift or thrown in a vacuum.