Go Back   Science Forums Biology Forum Molecular Biology Forum Physics Chemistry Forum > General Science Forums > Physics Forum
Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Physics Forum Physics Forum. Discuss and ask physics questions, kinematics and other physics problems.

Basic physics questions

Basic physics questions - Physics Forum

Basic physics questions - Physics Forum. Discuss and ask physics questions, kinematics and other physics problems.

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-11-2006, 01:00 AM
Posts: n/a
Default Basic physics questions

Is this an appropriate forum for basic physics questions?

If so, I have a quick one: does a 50 pound object travelling at 100 mph
have the same force as a 100 pound object traveling at 50 mph?

If not, is there a formula to determine which has more force?

Isn't it Force = Velocity x Mass ?

Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2006, 02:19 AM
Posts: n/a
Default Basic physics questions

Mass times velocity is *momentum*.

Force is mass time *acceleration.

Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA

Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2006, 03:47 AM
N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
Posts: n/a
Default Basic physics questions

Dear Pat:

"Pat" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message
news:1142038814.966521.218520@p10g2000cwp.googlegr oups.com...


If you were to slam these two objects head on into each other,
and they stuck together, they would come to a dead stop. As Tom
pointed out, the momentum of each object is m * v, so their
momenta (which are each a vector quantity... direction is really
important) net to zero.

Now for such slow speeds, the energy of each one... the amount of
"force times time" it took to get them up to speed, is much
greater for the lighter but faster one (in this case)

Energy = 1/2 * mass * (velocity)^2

In your example, it took twice the force or twice the time to get
the smaller mass to the higher speed.

Now as to what *you* mean by "force"... ?

David A. Smith

Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2006, 01:46 PM
Posts: n/a
Default Basic physics questions

Pat wrote:

Unfortunately, this is where common language usage of terms like speed,
impact, force, momentum, energy, inertia gets pretty muddy. In the
newspapers, words like this describing a football player's motion are
all used pretty much interchangably.

When you start wanting to do things quantitatively, like you're doing,
then the *precise* definitions used in physics become crucial.

What's true in the statement above is that the *momentum* of both
objects is the same, which means that in an impact with a stationary
object, the result will be comparable in terms of the *momentum* of the
struck object after the collision.

However, the *force* applied depends on the interval of time of the
contact. This is why, even though your change of momentum is the same
in both cases, stopping your head with an airbag is preferred over
stopping your head with the steering wheel in a collision.

Moreover, the *energy* delivered depends on the details of the
collision and whether some of that energy is devoted to breaking up the
structure of the struck object. Consider the damage of bullet, which
has less momentum than a swung 2x4.


Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2006, 12:11 PM
Andre van Zadel
Posts: n/a
Default Basic physics questions

On 10 Mar 2006 17:00:15 -0800, "Pat" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote:

Hi Pat,

No, the correct formula is : Force = Acceleration x Mass
(in a socalled inertial reference system)
Acceleration is "change of velocity"
In your examples the objects travel at a constant velocity (i.e
accelaration = zero) and therefore the force is zero in both cases.

Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2006, 11:54 PM
The TimeLord
Posts: n/a
Default Basic physics questions

On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 17:00:15 -0800, "Pat" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote
in <1142038814.966521.218520@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups .com>:


No, mass*velocity is actually momentum. Force is defined in
physics as the rate of change of momentum. In classical physics
this turns out to be mass*(change in velocity)=mass*acceleration.

To approach the problem you posed, it's better to find the force
from energy. The analysis would go as follows:

Kinetic energy is 1/2*mass*velocity^2=1/2*mass*velocity*velocity.
So the first object has 1/2*50*100*100 KE units of kinetic energy
= 250'000 KE units
The second object has 1/2*100*50*50 KE units
= 125'000 KE units

Now, in a collision, the kinetic energy will be converted to
potential energy over equal distances. So the 50 lb object
will have twice the force than the 100 lb object even though
both have the same momentum.

This is bourne out by observations that faster-moving smaller
cars often inflict as much damage to an SUV as another SUV at a
slower speed.

Hope this helps.

// The TimeLord says:
// Pogo 2.0 = We have met the aliens, and they are us!

Reply With Quote

basic , physics , questions

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Moving Dimensions Theory Book Due Out in Fall 05--Very Rough Draft: 4th Dimensions Expanding Relative to 3 Spatial Dimensions jollyrogership@yahoo.com Physics Forum 64 03-31-2012 10:24 AM
Simply put, MOVING DIMENSIONS THEORY is THE NEW MODEL: http://physicsmathforums.com drelliot@gmail.com Physics Forum 0 08-29-2006 06:32 AM
Moving Dimensions Theory!! Rock On!! drelliot@gmail.com Physics Forum 1 07-06-2006 05:19 PM
Physics and Life - by Paul Davies Laurent Physics Forum 6 01-15-2004 04:17 PM

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:08 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005 - 2012 Molecular Station | All Rights Reserved
Page generated in 0.18229 seconds with 16 queries