- #1

- 83

- 20

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- B
- Thread starter Beanyboy
- Start date

- #1

- 83

- 20

- #2

- 35,847

- 4,676

Initial upward velocity.

Zz.

- #3

BvU

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 14,356

- 3,679

The fact that it already had been given an upward velocity

- #4

BvU

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 14,356

- 3,679

Inertia makes that this velocity is reduced (by g m/s per second) only 'gradually'

- #5

- 83

- 20

- #6

BvU

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 14,356

- 3,679

Who says we don't ? The scientific term is 'momentum' : mass x velocity

- #7

- 35,847

- 4,676

This is very difficult to decipher.

A "push" usually means there is an applied force acting on a body. Once the coin leaves your hand on the way up, there is no longer a "push" by the hand onto the coin. The ONLY force then acting on the coin is gravity. If there is no gravity, the coin will continue to move upward at a constant velocity. Due to gravity, the coin moves upward first but it is slowing down.

You need to go back to Newton's First Law and understand what it says.

Zz.

- #8

- 83

- 20

Thanks for the help, but still confused here.

- #9

- 35,847

- 4,676

Thanks for the help, but still confused here.

One more time: INITIAL UPWARD VELOCITY is NOT A FORCE!

"velocity" has units of m/s. Force has units of N. Why are you confusing these two as being the same?

Zz.

- #10

- 83

- 20

This is very difficult to decipher.

A "push" usually means there is an applied force acting on a body. Once the coin leaves your hand on the way up, there is no longer a "push" by the hand onto the coin. The ONLY force then acting on the coin is gravity. If there is no gravity, the coin will continue to move upward at a constant velocity. Due to gravity, the coin moves upward first but it is slowing down.

You need to go back to Newton's First Law and understand what it says.

Zz.

I'm familiar with Newton's First Law and the fact that it is a special case of Newton's Second Law, since the sum of the net forces is zero.One more time: INITIAL UPWARD VELOCITY is NOT A FORCE!

"velocity" has units of m/s. Force has units of N. Why are you confusing these two as being the same?

Zz.

I thank you for the distinction between the "initial applied force" and the forces acting on the coin once airborne: this helped. You might consider avoiding writing in caps - this can give the reader the impression that you are shouting.

- #11

- 35,847

- 4,676

I'm familiar with Newton's First Law and the fact that it is a special case of Newton's Second Law, since the sum of the net forces is zero.

I thank you for the distinction between the "initial applied force" and the forces acting on the coin once airborne: this helped. You might consider avoiding writing in caps - this can give the reader the impression that you are shouting.

I HAD to do it because writing "initial upward velocity" didn't appear to sink in since you kept thinking that it is a force, even when the word "velocity" was in there.

However, even reading this, it appears that you're still thinking of some "initial" force, when all you should be caring about is the fact that this object has an initial velocity, no matter how it got it. You need to straighten this out before you dive into 2D projectile motion.

Zz.

- #12

jtbell

Mentor

- 15,755

- 3,965

The force that causes the coin to move upwards is the one that you exert on it with your hand. However, in this context, "trajectory" meansAccording to my textbook (Hewitt), if we discount air-resistance, the ONLY force acting on a tossed coin at all points of its trajectory, is mg. For me, this begs the question: what then is causing the coin to move upward during the first half of its trajectory?

- #13

BvU

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 14,356

- 3,679

dear Bb,

Seems you have some elementary background missing, let's try to fill that up:

http://pi.math.cornell.edu/~numb3rs/jrajchgot/508f.html

In this link, the first graph shows (only qualitatively) something similar to your coin flight: Initially it goes upward with an upward velocity. The acceleration is constant and in an opposite direction, so the upward velocity decreases linearly with time. It reaches zero at some point, meaning the extreme position (max height) is reached. Velocity changes sign and from now on is downward, in the same direction as the acceleration. Meaning its magnitude increases: falling faster and faster.

The acceleration (blue line) has been constant and negative (= downward) all the way from time zero

Seems you have some elementary background missing, let's try to fill that up:

http://pi.math.cornell.edu/~numb3rs/jrajchgot/508f.html

In this link, the first graph shows (only qualitatively) something similar to your coin flight: Initially it goes upward with an upward velocity. The acceleration is constant and in an opposite direction, so the upward velocity decreases linearly with time. It reaches zero at some point, meaning the extreme position (max height) is reached. Velocity changes sign and from now on is downward, in the same direction as the acceleration. Meaning its magnitude increases: falling faster and faster.

The acceleration (blue line) has been constant and negative (= downward) all the way from time zero

Last edited:

- #14

- 83

- 20

The force that causes the coin to move upwards is the one that you exert on it with your hand. However, in this context, "trajectory" meansafterthe coin has left your hand. The only force acting on the coin now is gravity. The force that you exerted on it has already taken place before the trajectory began. It determined the initial upward velocity.

This is very helpful. I was aware that at the crest of its motion, the sum of the forces would be zero. I was asking myself: What's the other force that's being negated by the weight of the coin?".Hewitt's text threw me, but thanks to you, I now see that "trajectory" means after the coin has left the hand.

Thanks again for the clarifying.

- #15

sophiecentaur

Science Advisor

Gold Member

2020 Award

- 25,796

- 5,195

The net sum of the forces is NOT zero. If they were, it would carry on upwards and leave the Earth. There is a very non-zero force acting which is the weight force on the object. Gravity is theI'm familiar with Newton's First Law and the fact that it is a special case of Newton's Second Law, since the sum of the net forces is zero.

Your confusion was explained, way back, by Galileo and others and the 'reality' is not intuitive so you were in good company.

- #16

- 35,847

- 4,676

This is very helpful. I was aware that at the crest of its motion, the sum of the forces would be zero.

Again, this is why I said earlier that I still think you have not understood this scenario. This is still wrong.

Throughout the trajectory, i.e. AFTER it has left the tossing hand, there is only ONE constant force - gravitational force. This is true at every point along the motion of the coin, even at the "crest".

So no, I do not believe you've understood what Newton's First Law is. You may have read it, and think you know, but everything that you've said here seems to indicate that you do not know what the words mean physically.

Zz.

- #17

- 83

- 20

The thick plottens! Thanks for drawing attention to my mistake. "Of all the intellectual hurdles which the human mind has confronted and has overcome in the past fifteen hundred years, the one which seems to me to have been the most amazing in character and the most stupendous in the scope of its consequences is the one relating to the problem of motion.... " (Butterfield)The net sum of the forces is NOT zero. If they were, it would carry on upwards and leave the Earth. There is a very non-zero force acting which is the weight force on the object. Gravity is theonlyforce acting, once it has left the arm of the thrower and it applies for all the lifetime of the object - before and after the throw. Before and after it's journey, the weight force is balanced by the table it was resting on and the ground where it lands.

Your confusion was explained, way back, by Galileo and others and the 'reality' is not intuitive so you were in good company.

What then is the acceleration of the coin at the top of its trajectory?

- #18

russ_watters

Mentor

- 20,476

- 7,103

You tell us. I'll give you a hint: you've already said it, here in this thread!What then is the acceleration of the coin at the top of its trajectory?

- #19

- 83

- 20

You tell us. You have all the information in front of you, here in this thread!

Well, I would have assumed it was zero. But, I assumed that this zero was the sum of two forces. Since now I'm being told there's only one force in operation while the coin is in motion, I'm left wondering how does that become zero?,

I used a = f/m. Since the net forces in the numerator come to zero, this yields zero acceleration.

- #20

russ_watters

Mentor

- 20,476

- 7,103

You gave us the correct answer in your very first post and the rest of the thread has been you repeatedly not wanting to accept the answer that you already know. So please: tell us the answer you already gave us -- and then accept it!Well, would have assumed it was zero. But, I assumed that this zero was the sum of two forces. Since now I'm being told there's only one force in operation while the coin is in motion, I'm left wondering how does that become zero?

- #21

- 83

- 20

As a learner one must humble oneself to reach out and expose one's lack of understanding. Seeming "stupid" is not something that gives me any pleasure. Please try to be a bit more empathetic.

- #22

BvU

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 14,356

- 3,679

It isI was aware that at the crest of its motion, the sum of the forces would be zero.

I am sincerely convinced you are not stupid. It's just that you have difficulty distinguishing position ##x##, velocity ##v = {dx\over dt} ## and acceleration ##a = {dv\over dt} = {d^2 x\over dt^2}##

- #23

- 83

- 20

I thought I was aware of the distinction between velocity and acceleration, both qualitatively and quantitatively, but it seems my thinking is muddled.

It's going to take me a while to digest your answer and try to figure out the nature of my misunderstanding. Expect a more detailed reply within 24 hours.

- #24

- 31,230

- 7,946

The initial upwards velocity is not a force. The units are different.Describing the "initial upward velocity" as a force

- #25

Vanadium 50

Staff Emeritus

Science Advisor

Education Advisor

- 26,833

- 10,514

Share: