NSD Login
Forums
Statistics
- Users
- 2849
- Articles
- 156
- Articles View Hits
- 1697926
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
born2see wrote: Con20or,
I think it would depend on the relative density of each individual as the shot passed through him, what he was wearing, equipment, etc...
I don't think you could ignore deceleration as it passed through the individual.
More importantly, why in the hell did you post this question knowing we'll get treatises on experimental and theoretical physics as well as empirical data?
B
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
And indeed you shall. This is actually a straightforward calculation that yields an interesting result. The result is happily confirmed by the historic record.More importantly, why in the hell did you post this question knowing we'll get treatises on experimental and theoretical physics as well as empirical data?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Marching Thru Georgia wrote: That's rather remarkable when you think about it. The distance the cannonball travels is independent of the initial velocity. Extra credit will be awarded if you can explain why this is so.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Gutsy, your first post and you venture into a very deep pool. Yes, that's the correct answer. Both the kinetic and the dissipation of that energy are dependent on the same power of the velocity. So if the sphere is moving 1cm/sec or 500M/sec it will travel exactly the same distance when the kinetic energy will drop to 0. The reason that doesn't happen on the battlefield, is that we bags of salty water have a rather thin, but tough membrane surrounding us.I am going to venture that it is because both KE and the retardive force vary with the square of velocity.
Even so, I would prefer to get hit by a 12 lbr rolling along the ground 2 mph
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Marching Thru Georgia wrote:
Now let's give Born2see and Con20or some desert to chew on. We all know that it takes more gas to go the same distance at 60MPH versus 50MPH. It is more than can be explained by the velocity squared. Why? Hint: Road friction is not the answer.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Marching Thru Georgia wrote: Engine and rolling friction are only minor components. There is one big contributor to the gas consumption. Still waiting to hear from the physics aficionados Born2see and Con20or.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Marching Thru Georgia wrote: Engine and rolling friction are only minor components. There is one big contributor to the gas consumption. Still waiting to hear from the physics aficionados Born2see and Con20or.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please show your work to justify this statement.In addition, the solution to the original problem may need to account for rotational energy of the projectile, depending upon whether it is a smoothbore or rifled cannon.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
And again, this is where you get yourself into trouble. As I said before, hand waving arguments are fine in fluff subjects like history or social studies, but in the physical sciences you have to do the calculation to justify your position. The rotational momentum is orthogonal to the translational momentum. I think part of your answer shows you know this. So the question arises, how can forces at right angles to each other, influence each other? The answer is they can't. This should have been one of the first things you learned in high school physics.At this point, my limited knowledge of physics dissipates (pun intended), and I will proceed off of pure conjecture, based in logical reasoning.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.