Understanding Elastic Collisions: Solving a Head-On Collision Problem

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on an elastic collision problem involving two identical 6 gram balls, where one ball moves north at 3 m/s and collides head-on with another moving south at 2 m/s. After the collision, the first ball moves south at 1 m/s, leading to confusion regarding the velocity of the second ball. According to the law of conservation of momentum, the second ball must move at 2 m/s post-collision, contradicting the conservation of energy principle, which states that energy should not be lost in elastic collisions. The participants conclude that the problem may contain errors in its wording or assumptions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of elastic collisions in physics
  • Familiarity with the law of conservation of momentum
  • Knowledge of kinetic energy calculations
  • Basic principles of physics problem-solving
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the principles of elastic collisions in classical mechanics
  • Study the law of conservation of momentum in detail
  • Learn how to calculate kinetic energy and its implications in collisions
  • Examine common pitfalls in physics problem statements and solutions
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics, educators teaching mechanics, and anyone interested in understanding the principles of momentum and energy conservation in collisions.

cybernerd
Messages
26
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A 6 gram ball moving north at a rate of 3 m/s collides head on with an identical ball moving south at 2.0 m/s. The collision is elastic and the first ball moves south at 1 m/s. What is the velocity of the second ball?

Homework Equations



Law of conservation of momentum.
p=mv

The Attempt at a Solution



The question makes no sense to me. According to my solution guide, the other ball moves off at 2.0 m/s. But of the collision is elastic, then no energy should be wasted. So...2.0m/s worth of energy from the first ball is sucked into an abyss? Can anyone shed light on this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yeah I don't know about this one. Energy's definitely not conserved using the given data. Chalk it up to a miswording?
 
I hope so, or we're getting into magic rather than physics...thanks for confirming this...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K