Velocity from using only weight mass and kilogram force?

AI Thread Summary
Velocity in space can be calculated using the formula V = at, where 'a' is acceleration derived from force and mass. To find acceleration, convert the thrust from tons to Newtons and apply Newton's second law (F = ma). The discussion clarifies that mass should be in kilograms and force in Newtons, emphasizing that kilograms or tonnes are not forces. The time duration for which the force is applied is crucial for determining the resulting velocity. Understanding these principles allows for accurate calculations of velocity in a vacuum environment.
pisola
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
i was wondering about counting velocity only from weight mass and from kilogram force (like force from rocket thruster)

ex: there's a rocket in space, its weight is 63 metric tons and the rocket thruster output is 128 tons. i won't include the G force, cause i want to look the velocity when it's in space.

is there a formula to count velocity from that kind of category? of course the velocity would be km/h

to make it simple for the kilogram force, i try to convert 128 tons force to Newton, which is 125,5251.2 Newton
 
Physics news on Phys.org
F = ma everywhere
 
SteamKing said:
F = ma everywhere

um, can you explain...?

i'm a little idiot to physics, so can you please explain step by step how can get that formula to fit the description above...?
 
Force in Newtons, Mass in kilograms and acceleration in metres per second squared.
The velocity will depend on how long the force has been applied. V = at

BTW kilogram or a tonne is not a force. A force is measured in Newtons in SI units.
What do you actually want to know and what do you mean by "count velocity"?
 
Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'

Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'

Here are two fragments from Banach's monograph in Mechanics I have never seen the term <<velocity of transport>> in English texts. Actually I have never seen this term being named somehow in English. This term has a name in Russian books. I looked through the original Banach's text in Polish and there is a Polish name for this term. It is a little bit surprising that the Polish name differs from the Russian one and also differs from this English translation. My question is: Is there...
View full post »

Thread 'Is calling fictitious forces "not real" just about terminology?'

Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
View full post »

Similar threads

B Why Is an Object's Weight Equal to the Force of Gravity It Experiences?
2
Replies
51
Views
4K
I Apparent Weight problem (falling beam)
Replies
2
Views
2K
B Understanding Momentum: The Relationship Between Mass, Velocity, and Force
Replies
29
Views
3K
Newton's Law: Mass at Rest vs Falling from 100m
Replies
12
Views
2K
Effects of velocity on weight (mass?)
Replies
3
Views
2K
I Remark on centrifugal force in Heino Falcke's black hole book
Replies
22
Views
3K
I How to convert density ratio of grams/ mm^3 into metric tonnes/ m^3
Replies
6
Views
2K
B Calculate needed dimensions of table - Center of mass, levers etc
Replies
11
Views
2K
Confusion about conservation of energy vs. momentum
Replies
3
Views
2K
Potential and kinetic force of an arrow shot at space.
Replies
1
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top