Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
given that all things fall at the same rate (wind resistance not taken in to account) what is the 0 to 60 time of a falling object? I just wondered if my car would accelerate quicker than it would fall..................mmmmmmmmm deep :p
  • Replies 33
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • davidgh

    4

  • woz

    4

  • mad lon

    3

  • Westfields Rock On

    3

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

This has something to do with 9.81 metres per second per second Newtons equation (or law) of gravity  ???

I just wondered if my car would accelerate quicker than it would fall

In theory you would both accelerate at the same speed, sounds wierd but tis true, however, i might have got my wires crossed and wasted 3 years at university  :down:

No doubt some smart alec will be along to shoot me down in flames  :(

Posted
Woz you talkin about.If I remember me physics,when I wos a lad things that fell, accelerated at 32 ft/sec/sec I think.Can your Wessie get t'32 ft in a second  ???
Posted

IIRC

v = u + at

u = 0 (starts from 0)

a = 32 ft/s2

60 mph = 88 ft/s

ergo: 88 = 0 + 32t

therefore t = 88/32 =  2.75 seconds

Apols if memory fade has cut in  --  it was a long time ago.

Posted
so are we saying that the 0 to 60 of a falling object is 2.75 seconds? if so I dont think I can match that
Posted
Maybe in space....no one can here you scream  :D
Posted
or for us sprinting types = 2s 64ft time.
Posted
In theory you would both accelerate at the same speed
is this both falling ? not 1 falling and 1 (the car ) accelerating? I.E. all things fall at the same rate but not all cars accelerate at the same rate?
Posted
Maybe in space....no one can here you scream
maybe in space you can accelerate faster than you can fall?????????????  oo err in space which way do you fall? what way is down? aggggggghhhhhhhh I'm going mad :(      :D
Posted

i int clever so i maybe wrong. innit:

v = u+at

v-u=at

(v-u)/a=t

(60 x 1600)/(60x60)-0 / 9.81 = 2.72 seconds

Posted
You wont be accelerating in space, not enought Oxygen to run an internal combustion engine ;)
Posted
you can accelerate in space for every action theres an equal and opposite reaction
Posted

Blimey, thought i was starting to read the wrong forum, its getting a bit " Star Trekky" now.

:bangshead:  :bangshead:  :suspect:  :sheep:

Posted

yeah but would a dyson be able to suck up moon dust on the moon it is after all a powerful vacuum cleaner :p

(warning just finish a 12 hour nigth shift and well into a bottle of red :D  :D )

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please review our Terms of Use, Guidelines and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.