Another physics question. - TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Another physics question.
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

Posted by Zild on Aug-18-2009 01:11:

quote:
Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit
i would think a larger angle would give more flight time at the same velocity

apologies i meant obtuse you are def right like i said it is somewhere between 45 degrees which is max time of flight and what you have for the other one

wish i could help you out a little more but i took half a xan bar earlier and i'm a little loopy

Posted by Krypton on Aug-18-2009 01:24:

Re: Another physics question.

quote:
Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit
i couldnt figure this one out on my exam .. it was tough lets see if anyone can do it here.

2 stones are thrown from the top of a building at 35 m/s. The first one lands after 5 seconds and travels a distance of 150 meters. The second one lands 2 seconds after.

Find.

Both initial angles

The height of the building

The distance for the second stone.

Good luck

I can get all the information for the first one.. but i'm lost with the second one completely

Answer...

Posted by bARTovsky on Aug-18-2009 04:32:

Posted by Pokit on Aug-18-2009 07:26:

Lucky for you, I had some extra time on my hands and solved it.

You said you solved the first part, so all you need to do is use the height of the building, and the given time for the second stone and look at the motion of the stone in the Y direction only and you can find the Y velocity. Once you find the Y velocity you can just use trig to find the x velocity and use that to find distance.

Edit:
The link below is the solution (in case you can't figure it out)

http://img257.**************/img257/926/photoidb.jpg

Posted by Zild on Aug-18-2009 07:29:

dude you're totally ruining his learning process... we already gave him everything he needed to figure it out

Posted by Pokit on Aug-18-2009 07:37:

quote:
Originally posted by Zild
dude you're totally ruining his learning process... we already gave him everything he needed to figure it out

From the looks of his post, he wanted us to solve the problem.

Posted by Zild on Aug-18-2009 07:39:

quote:
Originally posted by Pokit
From the looks of his post, he wanted us to solve the problem.

But he was just one step away and had all the info he needed in his diagram and equations.

to be honest if it was a chem problem i wouldn't have been able to help myself i love that shit

Posted by Pokit on Aug-18-2009 07:48:

quote:
Originally posted by Zild
to be honest if it was a chem problem i wouldn't have been able to help myself i love that shit

Yeah, it's not often that stuff like this is posted so I get excited and solve it instead of helping.

Posted by alexf on Aug-18-2009 08:25:

sorry, tbh this is really BASIC stuff. if you werent able to figure that out with the needed formulas and general knowledge maybe you should try out different things other than physics in the future? sorry if that sounds harsh, it's meant as a good advice

Posted by Chimney on Aug-18-2009 17:55:

quote:
Originally posted by alexf
sorry, tbh this is really BASIC stuff. if you werent able to figure that out with the needed formulas and general knowledge maybe you should try out different things other than physics in the future? sorry if that sounds harsh, it's meant as a good advice

Everytime a scientist gets stuck he should give up and choose another career. That's what Einstein would do.

Great thinking there.

Posted by Zild on Aug-18-2009 18:02:

quote:
Originally posted by Chimney
Everytime a scientist gets stuck he should give up and choose another career. That's what Einstein would do.

Great thinking there.

"Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new." from the man himself...

Posted by Acton on Aug-18-2009 18:13:

There was me hoping this thread might have a challenge in it. It's ridiculously easy, I hope in time you realise what an dumbass you've been .

Edit*....Well, easy in my opinion.

Posted by Nrg2Nfinit on Aug-18-2009 23:30:

look back now it seems so easy.. i guess the part i screwed up on was over complicating the question

if you have an initial height, set it to zero and use your height as a negative distance to travel downwards

the velocity acceleration time and distance equation will account for positive and negative motion. Once you reduce your velocity with negative acceleration to zero, you will have a negative velocity and a negative displacement. You account for that negative displacement as the height of the building and solve for your initial velcity in the y component.

thanks guys.

Now i feel like a dumbass lol

Pages (2): « 1 [2]