Does Instantaneous Velocity Account for Launch Height in Kinematics?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between launch height and instantaneous velocity in kinematics. It clarifies that while the initial height (y0) drops out when calculating instantaneous velocity, the time taken to reach a final height (yf) differs for objects launched from varying heights. Consequently, an object launched from a greater height will have a higher velocity upon reaching the same final position due to the longer time of fall. The conversation also touches on the confusion surrounding the application of special relativity in the context of a non-relativistic formula. Overall, the participants emphasize the importance of understanding these concepts in the context of kinematics.
starstruck_
Messages
185
Reaction score
8
<Moderator's note: Split from another thread and thus no template.>
I am working on my special relativity assignment right now, and it said to find the velocity of an object when it hits the ground. The height the object is launched at is > 0.

Question: comparing that velocity to the instantaneous velocity, does the instantaneous velocity not account for the fact that an object would have a higher velocity at a given point if it’s launched from a greater height?

Say you had two objects whose height can be modeled by the function y(t) = y0+ by-0.5gt^2

When you find the instantaneous velocity, the y0 term disappears. However, we know that the velocity of an object would be greater if it has a greater height.

What’s the difference here?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
starstruck_ said:
<Moderator's note: Split from another thread and thus no template.>
I am working on my special relativity assignment right now, and it said to find the velocity of an object when it hits the ground. The height the object is launched at is > 0.

Question: comparing that velocity to the instantaneous velocity, does the instantaneous velocity not account for the fact that an object would have a higher velocity at a given point if it’s launched from a greater height?

Say you had two objects whose height can be modeled by the function y(t) = y0+ by-0.5gt^2

When you find the instantaneous velocity, the y0 term disappears. However, we know that the velocity of an object would be greater if it has a greater height.

What’s the difference here?
The question is a bit confused. If I understand correctly, you are considering two objects dropped from a certain initial height and on which only gravity is acting? And you are asking about the instantaneous velocity when they have reached some final height yf, right?

You are right that yo drops out, but the key point is that the time that the will have taken for each object will be different. For the one dropped from a larger height, the time taken to reach the final position yf will be larger. That's why the velocity will be larger for that object.
 
  • Like
Likes starstruck_
nrqed said:
The question is a bit confused. If I understand correctly, you are considering two objects dropped from a certain initial height and on which only gravity is acting? And you are asking about the instantaneous velocity when they have reached some final height yf, right?

You are right that yo drops out, but the key point is that the time that the will have taken for each object will be different. For the one dropped from a larger height, the time taken to reach the final position yf will be larger. That's why the velocity will be larger for that object.

Thank you! That’s what I reasoned out before I confused my self.

This assignment just has me stressed out, I didn’t learn anything in this class, it’s so hard to follow what he’s doing and now I have to do dimensionless analysis all of a sudden. Oof
 
starstruck_ said:
Thank you! That’s what I reasoned out before I confused my self.

This assignment just has me stressed out, I didn’t learn anything in this class, it’s so hard to follow what he’s doing and now I have to do dimensionless analysis all of a sudden. Oof
You are welcome. Although I am a bit puzzled since you mention SR in your title but the formula you use is non relativistic.
 
  • Like
Likes starstruck_
nrqed said:
You are welcome. Although I am a bit puzzled since you mention SR in your title but the formula you use is non relativistic.

We haven’t started actual SR yet, we’ve been doing dimensionless analysis to go from the Galilean theory to the Newtonian theory over the past 3 weeks (and I absolutely do not understand anything, or at least I didn’t until I worked my way through part of this assignment).

EDIT: it’s just practice with kinematics formulas we already know
 
  • Like
Likes nrqed
starstruck_ said:
We haven’t started actual SR yet, we’ve been doing dimensionless analysis to go from the Galilean theory to the Newtonian theory over the past 3 weeks (and I absolutely do not understand anything, or at least I didn’t until I worked my way through part of this assignment).

EDIT: it’s just practice with kinematics formulas we already know
Ah ok, that makes sense now :-) Best luck. And don't hesitate to ask questions here!
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top