To stop a moving object -- Momentum or Kinetic Energy

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concepts of momentum and kinetic energy in the context of stopping a moving object. Participants explore how to visualize and apply these concepts to various scenarios, including a rugby tackle, and consider the implications of mass and speed on the energy required to stop an object.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests using Newton's 2nd law (F=ma) to analyze the stopping of a moving object, noting that both momentum and kinetic energy will reach zero when the object stops.
  • Another participant emphasizes that while stopping an object with greater mass and speed requires dissipating more energy, it does not necessarily mean it takes more energy to stop; rather, it releases more energy.
  • Participants discuss the relationship between energy and distance covered while stopping against a constant force, and how momentum relates to the time taken to stop.
  • There is a consideration of how to explain the physics of stopping a rugby player to a layperson, questioning whether the energy approach or momentum approach is more appropriate.
  • One participant argues that the difficulty of tackling someone is more of an engineering question than a physics question, suggesting that a specific mechanism for the tackle would be necessary to frame it as a physics problem.
  • A later reply points out that the original questions may be overly simplified, indicating that a rugby tackle involves more complex dynamics than simple collisions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriateness of using energy versus momentum to explain stopping a moving object. There is no consensus on which approach is more suitable, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the complexities involved in real-world scenarios like a rugby tackle.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the original questions may not fully capture the complexities of real-world dynamics, particularly in scenarios involving techniques and interactions beyond simple collisions.

bugatti79
Messages
786
Reaction score
4
How should I look at the problem at stopping a moving object with the following conditions

1) mass m and speed v

2) 0.5 m and 2v

3)0.5m and sqrt 2 v

Simple math tells me the number 2 would require more energy to stop it. I can relate to energy better in terms of how to stop a moving mass but how does one visualise in terms of momentum?

Thanks
B
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You should look at it using Newton's 2nd law, F=ma.

Both momentum mv, and kinetic energy ##\frac{mv^2}{2}## will reach zero at the same time , when v=0.
 
bugatti79 said:
H
Simple math tells me the number 2 would require more energy to stop it. I can relate to energy better in terms of how to stop a moving mass but how does one visualise in terms of momentum?
Number 2 will require you to dissipate more energy when you stop it. It does not take more energy -- it releases more.

More energy means that the object covers more distance while stopping against a constant force. It does more work.
More momentum means that the object takes more time while stopping against a constant force. It delivers more impulse/recoil.
 
jbriggs444 said:
Number 2 will require you to dissipate more energy when you stop it. It does not take more energy -- it releases more.

More energy means that the object covers more distance while stopping against a constant force. It does more work.
More momentum means that the object takes more time while stopping against a constant force. It delivers more impulse/recoil.

So in laymans terms if I was to describe a situation to my friend about stopping a 18stone rugby player in his tracks by a sufficient tackle..which would be more appropriate...the energy approach?
Or perhaps both are equivalent because to stop him covering more distance instantly is equivalent to reducing the time to bring him to a halt...? :-/
 
bugatti79 said:
So in laymans terms if I was to describe a situation to my friend about stopping a 18stone rugby player in his tracks by a sufficient tackle..which would be more appropriate...the energy approach?
Or perhaps both are equivalent because to stop him covering more distance instantly is equivalent to reducing the time to bring him to a halt...? :-/
A bullet has less energy, but will go right through you before you can stop it.

Edit: Less flip, the question as posed is not answerable. How difficult it is to tackle someone is not a physics question. It is an engineering question. If you could specify a mechanism for the tackle and quantify the difficulty then it might be reduced to a physics question.
 
To help the op, your questions are a bit too simplified. They would work for say colliding balls.

A rugby tackle has a lot of techniques that would require more complex equations.
Your simple equations might apply more to American football where tackles are more pure collisions and less wrestling moves. Hence one wears body armour, the other doesn't.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K