The Art

[usayit]

Ah.. yup... do you know why?

I'm old, but as I recall...

Gravity acts on everything in the same way, with the same force. You need something to counteract it to make any difference.

On Earth (relative to this experiment in physics), air acts as a fluid that the two objects need to 'sink' through. The bowling ball's mass outmatches the air's by so much, it has no problem at all bullying it's way through to get to the bottom. The feather's mass is much closer to that of the air's so it has a harder time pushing against it, which slows it's rate of decent.

On the moon, there is so little in the way of atmosphere that it doesn't effectively play a role as a counteracting force.

correct.... how about the second part (question) regarding the Kenetic energy = mass * velocity ^2.

hint was inertia.

 

[usayit]

But, if bears eat oats and does eat oats, do little lambs still eat ivy?

This one should be easy..

If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around, does it make sound?


This one I don't have an answer...

If every force has an equal and opposite, then what is the opposite of Gravity?

 

[usayit]

The ground speed doesn't matter. Air speed does.

THere it is! I knew my explanation could have been more simplistic.

 

[Buckster]

Ah.. yup... do you know why?

I'm old, but as I recall...

Gravity acts on everything in the same way, with the same force. You need something to counteract it to make any difference.

On Earth (relative to this experiment in physics), air acts as a fluid that the two objects need to 'sink' through. The bowling ball's mass outmatches the air's by so much, it has no problem at all bullying it's way through to get to the bottom. The feather's mass is much closer to that of the air's so it has a harder time pushing against it, which slows it's rate of decent.

On the moon, there is so little in the way of atmosphere that it doesn't effectively play a role as a counteracting force.

correct.... how about the second part (question) regarding the Kenetic energy = mass * velocity ^2.

hint was inertia.

Possibly, I don't understand the question. It doesn't affect the rate of decent, nor should it (that I know of).

To me, it means that on the moon, though they'll hit at the same time, the bowling ball will make a bigger 'dent' / sink further because even though they have the same velocity, the ball will have more kinetic energy built up than the feather due to its mass being greater than the feather's.

 

[Josh66]

For about the last 10 years I've been working on one type of aircraft or another ... the concept is pretty easy for me to picture.

It doesn't matter if the wheels are spinning at 5 or 5,000 RPM - they'll just go as fast as they have to until the bearings burn up.


That's why aircraft carries always point themselves into the wind before launch (and go as fast as they can in that direction).
If there's a 30kt wind, that's 30kt slower the plane can to move across the deck to get airborne. The airspeed would already be 30kt, with the plane just sitting there.

EDIT

A Nimitz class carrier has a top speed of 30kts+ (I guess the real speed is still classified...). (That's pretty fast for something that displaces more than 100,000 tons...lol.) If it were going that fast into a 30kt wind, the airspeed on deck would be 60kts.

 

[usayit]

Possibly, I don't understand the question. It doesn't affect the rate of decent, nor should it (that I know of).

To me, it means that on the moon, though they'll hit at the same time, the bowling ball will make a bigger 'dent' / sink further because even though they have the same velocity, the ball will have more kinetic energy built up than the feather due to its mass being greater than the feather's.

Its probably me making things more complex than they really are... but you are close.

Ke = 1/2 mass * velocity^2

If Ball has more mass than the feather, it seems (at first glance) that the ball should have more energy thus should hit the ground in less time even in vacuum. The hidden aspect of this is that the ball with its greater mass ALSO requires more energy to start its decent downward... due to inertia. "Object at rest tends to stay at rest". As such, the mass is actually not a big factor as it might seem.

 

[Overread]

Hint....

Inertia

hmm I don't think we got that far as school - if we did I might have forgotten that bit

 

[table1349]

Ok, so lets try a little different one here:

If a chicken and a half lays and egg and a half in a day and a half, how long will it take a monkey with a wooden leg to kick all of the seeds out of a dill pickle???

 

[Buckster]

42

 

[Josh66]

2 days.


:meh:

:lmao:

 

[Josh66]

If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around, does it make sound?

Of course it would.

Sound is nothing more than a pressure wave. Assuming that the atmospheric conditions were right for a pressure wave to form after impact (they would be, unless it was in a vacuum), there would be sound.
It doesn't matter if anybody is there to witness it.

Though, I guess you could say that the answer is yes AND no...

EDIT
If you want to be technical ... sound has to be 'heard' to be 'sound'. If it was unheard, it would just be a pressure wave.

This one I don't have an answer...

If every force has an equal and opposite, then what is the opposite of Gravity?

Anti-Gravity.

 

[usayit]

EDIT
If you want to be technical ... sound has to be 'heard' to be 'sound'. If it was unheard, it would just be a pressure wave.

Bingo

 

[usayit]

If every force has an equal and opposite, then what is the opposite of Gravity?

Anti-Gravity.[/QUOTE]

That's what I thought at first but

" anti-gravity is the idea of creating a place or object that is free from the force of gravity"

Free from a force isn't the opposite of said force.

 

[Josh66]

Maybe Antimatter?

Gravity is basically a side effect of mass. Antimatter is the opposite of mass, so it should produce the opposite of gravity.


edit
This is fun.

 

[usayit]

I thought anti-mattter meant matter which the electronics were + and protons -. If in contact with matter will cancel.

Many suggest that Gravity isn't even a force and that's were I'm biased towards at the moment. Think of a flat soft surface. A heavy object on this surface changes the contour of the surface. Objects in the vicinity of this contoured surface have a tendency to fall towards the heavy object (gravity). If the heavy object is infinitely dense, it can potentially sink so far into the surface that it breaks through... suggesting a black hole. that's essentially all i know about it