Why is the Height of a Mass Launched by a Spring Dependent on its Mass?

  • Thread starter Thread starter syang9
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Spring Two masses
AI Thread Summary
The height achieved by masses launched by a spring is independent of their mass when they are launched together, as they reach the same launch speed. This is because the elastic potential energy transforms into kinetic energy, which then converts to gravitational potential energy, resulting in an expression that does not depend on mass for height. However, the launch speed itself is influenced by the total mass, as the spring's potential energy is distributed based on the combined mass of the objects. Thus, while the height is the same for both masses when launched together, the launch speed varies with mass. The confusion arises from mixing the scenarios of launching two masses together versus launching them separately.
syang9
Messages
61
Reaction score
0
this problem came up in my mcat physics prep book. two masses, one twice as massive as the other, are placed on a platform atop a spring. when they're launched, what height do they achieve?

i know they reach the same height, and from a previously archived thread on this board, i understand (somewhat) the reason.. the elastic potential energy is first transformed to kinetic energy, which is then transformed to gravitational potential energy. equating the formulas for those two energies results in an expression that is independent of mass.

what confuses me is that this seems to imply that the height of a mass launched by a spring is independent of mass altogether. this is clearly false.. could someone explain why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
also, why is it incorrect to simply equate the elastic potential energy to the gravitational potential energy? this yields an expression that is clearly dependent on mass.
 
syang9 said:
the elastic potential energy is first transformed to kinetic energy, which is then transformed to gravitational potential energy. equating the formulas for those two energies results in an expression that is independent of mass.
For a given launch speed, the height reached is independent of mass (equate KE to GPE). But the launch speed depends on the mass (equate the spring PE to KE).

what confuses me is that this seems to imply that the height of a mass launched by a spring is independent of mass altogether. this is clearly false.. could someone explain why?
It doesn't imply that.

Can you state the exact problem?

syang9 said:
also, why is it incorrect to simply equate the elastic potential energy to the gravitational potential energy? this yields an expression that is clearly dependent on mass.
It's not incorrect at all.

Perhaps you are mixing up (1) Two masses launched together, with (2) Each mass launched separately?
 
hi syang9 ! :smile:
syang9 said:
also, why is it incorrect to simply equate the elastic potential energy to the gravitational potential energy? this yields an expression that is clearly dependent on mass.

I'll just add this to what Doc Al :smile: has said:

you can equate them, but how would that tell you how much of the energy goes to one mass, and how much to the other? :wink:
 
Doc Al said:
For a given launch speed, the height reached is independent of mass (equate KE to GPE). But the launch speed depends on the mass (equate the spring PE to KE).



so then, the reason that two masses launched together reach the same height is because the launch speed is determined by the total mass, right? after they are launched, they must reach the same height because they are traveling at the same speed.
 
Right!
 
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...
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Back
Top