Would a falling object have jerk?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of jerk and jounce in the context of a falling object under the influence of gravity. Participants explore the implications of changing acceleration as an object falls towards Earth, questioning the constancy of gravitational acceleration and the relevance of higher derivatives in this scenario.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that a falling object must experience jerk and jounce due to the changing distance from the center of gravity affecting acceleration.
  • Another participant questions whether the commonly taught value of 9.8 m/s² is truly constant, given the variations in gravitational pull with distance from Earth.
  • A different participant clarifies that the value of 9.8 m/s² is only an approximation near the Earth's surface and that gravitational force decreases with distance, supporting the idea that acceleration changes as an object falls.
  • One participant acknowledges that while jerk exists, it may not be a particularly useful concept in practical terms, emphasizing that the acceleration due to gravity is approximately constant for many problems.
  • Another participant notes that analyzing higher derivatives is relevant for proper acceleration, which remains constant at zero during free fall.
  • A later reply introduces a scenario involving a skydiver opening a parachute, suggesting a practical application of the concepts discussed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that acceleration changes as an object falls, leading to the presence of jerk. However, there is no consensus on the utility of analyzing jerk and jounce, nor on the implications for the constancy of gravitational acceleration.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the dependence of gravitational acceleration on distance from the Earth's center and the nuances of applying higher derivatives in different frames of reference. There are unresolved aspects regarding the practical significance of jerk and jounce in real-world scenarios.

Isaac0427
Insights Author
Gold Member
Messages
718
Reaction score
163
Hi guys! So I have been learning about jerk/jolt as the third time derivative of distance, and thinking about Newtons law of universal gravitation, and I have come to the conclusion that a falling object must have jerk, and even jounce. Here's how I came to that conclusion:
The acceleration of a falling object depends on the mass of the larger body (in this case earth) and the distance from the center of gravity. If an object is accelerating towards the earth, the distance from the center of gravity is changing, therefore changing the acceleration (probably a very minimal amount), which means there is jerk. Then, as the acceleration increases, the faster the object's distance from the center of gravity decreases, therefore changing the rate of change in acceleration, and giving the object jounce. It seems as if it could go on infinitely, like how the infinite derivative of an exponential function is not constant (that may be a really bad way of saying that but you know what I mean). Is this correct or am I missing something?
Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Oh, and also, would that mean the constant 9.8 m/s^2 they teach us is not actually constant?
 
It is important to remember that the "constant" of 9.8m/s^2 only applies when you are near the surface of the earth, and that the farther away you are from earth, the weaker the gravity's pull as you can see from the equation:

F=G(m_1m_2)/r^2

Where G is the actual universal gravity constant and r is the radius between mass one and two. So as an object approaches the center of the earth, there is less force on that object, so you are correct in that regard. Also realize that just because you can continuously take the derivative of an object, does not necessarily give you more information.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Isaac0427
Yes. The acceleration does change as an object falls toward the earth. So there is a jerk or whatever, the derivative of acceleration with respect to time, though that is not a particularly useful concept. The acceleration due to gravity when an object is close to the surface of the earth, given the symbol g, is indeed only approximately 9.8 m/s^2. It is not "really" a constant. For most problems, the difference from the usually written value is small enough not to matter. There also other reasons for the changes in g, reasons other than just the distance from the center of the earth. I refer you to any introductory textbook of physics for a discussion.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Isaac0427
Isaac0427 said:
Is this correct or am I missing something?
In terms of coordinate acceleration in certain frames of reference, yes. But analyzing those higher derivatives is mainly relevant for proper acceleration, which is constant at zero in free fall.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Isaac0427
Thanks guys!
 
OP - You might like to ponder what happens when a sky diver opens his parachute .
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K