You're not understanding. Terminal velocity is a very well understood physical thing. You're only talking about freefall in a vacuum.
Pool Ball Terminal Velocity
- Thread starter Mr. Bond
- Start date
You're not understanding. Terminal velocity is a very well understood physical thing. You're only talking about freefall in a vacuum.
Terminal velocity for falling objects is about 9.8 m/s squared...whether a marble, a piano or banana.
http://indianapublicmedia.org/amomentofscience/ground-golf-bowling-ball/
When you break, you are not limited by terminal velocity...superman could break the balls at 100x terminal velocity...but the cue ball would explode.
It might depend on the mixture...
You're confused...nobody is talking about a vacuum here...only you. Terminal velocity is the same for most all falling objects of any mass...ie if you drop a golf ball and a bowling ball from a building they will hit the ground at the same time. The exception is if you drop a feather and a bowling ball...obviously the bowling ball will first...unless in a vacuum then they will hit at the same time...ie on the moon.
Youre confused. Sorry you don't understand. Terminal velocity has a specific meaning. Maybe you need to stay out of the discussion. Just a suggestion.
Terminal velocity is the maximum and constant final speed a falling object can obtain. The value is dependent on the shape of the object, its mass, and the density of the medium it fall through. Assuming the OP was talking about earth air, and normal pool balls, the terminal velocity is about 100 mph as calculated previously. A bowling ball, due to its high mass will have a higher terminal velocity (300mph or so).
Or you can tell me I'm confused. But I'm not. I'm just a mechanical engineer.
Last edited:
lol dude...I hope you are better in pool than in physics.
http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae6.cfm
You owe me an apology, but you won't give one.
Read the first sentence in the answer. It reveals all.
There are simple equations for this, just run the math.
I never understand why people argue about well understood math.
The terminal velocity is inversely proportional to both the square root of the drag coefficient and the square root of the cross sectional area.
You can imagine things all day long that give lie to the idea -- an arrow and a bowl of the same mass for example.
But just think about two humans falling out of a plane. One aims down and dives, one goes into a spread eagle. You see it all the time during sky dives. They are both at terminal velocity (after a few seconds anyway), but going at wildly different speeds.
Just do the math. There's never a point in arguing math. Show your work.
There are simple equations for this, just run the math.
I never understand why people argue about well understood math.
The terminal velocity is inversely proportional to both the square root of the drag coefficient and the square root of the cross sectional area.
You can imagine things all day long that give lie to the idea -- an arrow and a bowl of the same mass for example.
But just think about two humans falling out of a plane. One aims down and dives, one goes into a spread eagle. You see it all the time during sky dives. They are both at terminal velocity (after a few seconds anyway), but going at wildly different speeds.
Just do the math. There's never a point in arguing math. Show your work.
He doesn't understand the math. He doesn't understand the question.
There are simple equations for this, just run the math.
I never understand why people argue about well understood math.
The terminal velocity is inversely proportional to both the square root of the drag coefficient and the square root of the cross sectional area.
You can imagine things all day long that give lie to the idea -- an arrow and a bowl of the same mass for example.
But just think about two humans falling out of a plane. One aims down and dives, one goes into a spread eagle. You see it all the time during sky dives. They are both at terminal velocity (after a few seconds anyway), but going at wildly different speeds.
Just do the math. There's never a point in arguing math. Show your work.
Yep. I believe terminal velocity (the maximum speed an object reaches in free fall) happens when the drag (resistance to falling) becomes equal to the pull of gravity. All of this is dependent on the factors you and cornerman and others have mentioned, which is why different objects reach different terminal velocities at different times. Not sure how high you'd have to drop the ball from in order for it to have time to reach TV before it lands, but it can be calculated.
Math is awesome.
Correct on both counts....he may not know who he has locked horns with
Dude doesn't understand the laws of gravity.
Two objects of different mass only fall at the same rate in a vacuum. In the atmosphere, drag forces act on the object as it moves though the fluid (air). As velocity increases, these drag forces become larger. Terminal velocity is the point at which the drag force equals the force of gravity.
Last edited:
Even in a vacuum, the bowling ball will hit before the golf ball.
The reason a golf ball--or anything-- falls is because of a gravitational force exerted by the earth. But forces always come in pairs. By Newton's third law, the golf ball pulls on the earth just as hard as the earth pulls on the golf ball. As a result the earth accelerates toward the golf ball and comes to meet it a bit.
A bowling ball pulls way harder on the earth than does a golf ball, and so the earth comes further to meet it. And the time till they collide is shorter.
Seriously? what is the mass of either a golf ball or a bowling ball relative to the mass of the earth? Both are so negligable as to be effectively zero. I suppose that if they fell toward earth from an extremely long distance, and if the earth had no atmosphere, that it might be measurable.
I would hate for the earth to be pulled out of its orbit due to a really fat person jumping off of a high dive!
Most of us already knew this. And we answered the terminal velocity question correctly. You weren't part of "most of us." You still aren't. But, by all means, continued showing your vast ignorance.
Most of us already knew this. And we answered the terminal velocity question correctly. You weren't part of "mostof us." You still aren't. But, by all means, continued showing your vast ignorance.
Once again...
https://www.google.ca/search?q=whic...e..69i57j0.12087j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Btw, if you like talking about vacuums so much, maybe you should try selling them door to door.
Last edited:
How many times can you be proven wrong in one thread? What is this 5 times already?
https://www.google.ca/search?q=whic...e..69i57j0.12087j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
If you like talking about vacuums so much, maybe you should try selling them door to door.
Incredible. Not one time have you understood the question. I tutored Physics for over ten years. Please at least just stop making more of a fool of yourself.
Terminal velocity was the question. This is a Physics 101 question. A pool ball and a bowling ball and a marble and a penny have never had the same terminal velocity in earth's air. You've misunderstood the question, and you don't understand basic real-world physics.
When you're ready to eat crow, I've got the salt for you. Until then, you might want to keep quiet and read a bit.
Well, hopefully you've waded through the BS. As has been calculated, it's about 100 mph, despite the attempts of the wannabe physicist who didn't get past 8th grade physical science.
Per the snapshots, here are various terminal velocities for different bodies with clearly different masses. Additionally, per Lindwood, attached is also the basic quadratic formula for terminal velocity of a pool ball sphere through air. I estimated the density to get ~170g mass.
Hope this gets what you're looking for.
Freddie <~~~ none accepted
Attachments
Cornerman has this 100% correct. I am currently a tutor in physics and other things engineering and I graduate in December as a mechanical engineer. 8ballr you lost all credibility when you said that terminal velocity is 9.8 m/s^2. That Is acceleration and not velocity. Acceleration is the rate of change of velocity per unit of time. A velocity can never be an acceleration and vice versa.
