What Was the Initial Velocity of the Second Car in the Collision?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves a collision between two cars, one with a known mass and initial velocity, and the other with an unknown initial velocity. The scenario requires determining the initial velocity of the second car based on the conservation of momentum, given the final combined velocity after the collision.

Discussion Character

  • Assumption checking, Problem interpretation, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the implications of the negative sign in the calculated initial velocity of the second car, questioning whether it indicates an error in the setup or assumptions. There is also a focus on the directionality of the velocities involved and how they relate to the problem statement.

Discussion Status

Participants are exploring the implications of the problem's wording and the direction of motion. Some have pointed out potential inconsistencies in the problem statement regarding the direction of travel for the first car. Others have suggested that the negative result could be interpreted as a direction change rather than a calculation error.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted lack of clarity in the problem statement regarding the direction of the first car's travel, which has led to confusion about the interpretation of the results. The discussion also highlights the importance of understanding how negative velocities can indicate direction changes in physics problems.

Balsam
Messages
226
Reaction score
8

Homework Statement


A 1350kg car traveling at 72km/h collides with a slow-moving car of mass 1650kg, also initially traveling south. After the collision, the velocity of the 2 cars together is 24km/h. Determine the initial velocity at which the second car was travelling.

Given: m1=1350kg.
vi1 = 72km/h=20m/s
vf1 = 24km/h=6.6666666m/s

m2=1650kg
vf2=6.6666666m/s

Homework Equations


m1vi1+m2vi2=m1vf1+m2vf2

The Attempt at a Solution



1350(20)+1650(x)=1350(6.66666666)+1650(6.66666666)
27000+1650x=9000+11000
27000+1650x=20000
1650x=-7000
x=-4.24242424m/s=-15.2727272km/h

My answer was right except for the negative sign. Does the negative sign mean I did something wrong, because I didn't put negative signs infront of the velocity values in my calculations to indicate direction. What did I do wrong?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
It looks like there's something wrong with the question itself if what you've posted is a true reproduction of it. I notice that the question does not specify the direction of travel for the first car but then says that the second car is "also initially traveling south". Why "also"? It looks like the question has been edited (poorly).

Your calculations look fine for the information given (although you should really do something about presenting so many superfluous digits in results; Round to a suitable number of digits to match the given significant figures).

Perhaps someone updated the problem by changing a value or two (my guess is the mass of the second car) and didn't verify that the resulting velocity for it would turn out to be negative.
 
gneill said:
It looks like there's something wrong with the question itself if what you've posted is a true reproduction of it. I notice that the question does not specify the direction of travel for the first car but then says that the second car is "also initially traveling south". Why "also"? It looks like the question has been edited (poorly).

Your calculations look fine for the information given (although you should really do something about presenting so many superfluous digits in results; Round to a suitable number of digits to match the given significant figures).

Perhaps someone updated the problem by changing a value or two (my guess is the mass of the second car) and didn't verify that the resulting velocity for it would turn out to be negative.

The answer in the book is the same magnitude but the direction is [North]. And, I copied the question word for word from the textbook
 
Balsam said:
The answer in the book is the same magnitude but the direction is [North]. And, I copied the question word for word from the textbook
How does it make sense that the direction of the answer is [north] when the textbook question explicitly states that the initial velocity of the car is south?
 
Balsam said:
The answer in the book is the same magnitude but the direction is [North]. And, I copied the question word for word from the textbook
So, North is the opposite direction of South. It's a 180° direction change. That means your answer is fine, you just have to interpret the sign change as the direction change.
 
gneill said:
So, North is the opposite direction of South. It's a 180° direction change. That means your answer is fine, you just have to interpret the sign change as the direction change.

Oh, but then why does the textbook say that the initial velocity is in the south direction and the answer is north?
 
Balsam said:
How does it make sense that the direction of the answer is [north] when the textbook question explicitly states that the initial velocity of the car is south?
Technically, a velocity value can be positive or negative. In common language we don't use negative velocities when describing motion, we just say something is moving at a certain speed in a certain direction. But mathematically it is fine to say that something is moving with a negative speed in a given direction, which implies that it is actually moving in the opposite direction. It's something to be aware of when dealing with the mathematics.
 
gneill said:
Technically, a velocity value can be positive or negative. In common language we don't use negative velocities when describing motion, we just say something is moving at a certain speed in a certain direction. But mathematically it is fine to say that something is moving with a negative speed in a given direction, which implies that it is actually moving in the opposite direction. It's something to be aware of when dealing with the mathematics.

Thanks
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K