I Like Soup Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 being asian, i've already climaxed from this thread. no blue balls here. Hmm......from the Bay Area, don't engage in land war in Asia in Risk...I should have seen the signs! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 Three times in this thread, you've called it "high school physics", and yet you've never given a hint about what other factors are at play. Drop your knowledge, or stop trying to give everyone blue balls. Montster gave the right answer. I concur with him. I refer to HS physics because it takes nothing but gravity into account when determining how long an object will take to fall a particular distance. Oh, and Montster agrees with me. I can tell because he also referred to HS physics in his post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gonkis Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 if it's in the "high school physics" sense, ignoring all other variables (terrain, wind resistance, curvature of the earth, etc), they hit at the same time. acceleration = velocity/time velocity = distance/time therefore, acceleration = distance/[time * time] --> time = square root of [distance / acceleration] we know acceleration (gravity) and we know the distance (the height of each bullet, which is the same). therefore, the time is the same. atomic, please copy this in your own handwriting. i don't want to get in trouble with your teacher. +1, because the vertical force vector is constant on both. The fired bullet has a horizontal vector which is acting independent of the vertical one, but ignoring wind resistance, they hit at the same time. Ignoring things like wind resistance is the reason I passed on a career in Physics for EE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 unless the bullet actually IS generating lift somehow, i'm not sure the answer would be substantially different (or even minutely different) even if you were trying to account for aerodynamics and all those other variables. the spin and shape and all of that is about affecting trajectory and aerodynamic profile on the horizontal axis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 Ignoring things like wind resistance is the reason I passed on a career in Physics for EE. In the sense of purely studying and understanding gravity, ignoring things like wind resistance makes perfect sense. It just doesn't make good engineering sense And for that same reason I studied ME. Looking back on what I have done after school....it wouldn't have mattered much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gonkis Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 In the sense of purely studying and understanding gravity, ignoring things like wind resistance makes perfect sense. It just doesn't make good engineering sense And for that same reason I studied ME. Looking back on what I have done after school....it wouldn't have mattered much. Wurd. I work for an air tool company now, we don't plug anything into an outlet, unless it's sourcing compressed air! An ME degree would have been more suited to my current career. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 unless the bullet actually IS generating lift somehow, i'm not sure the answer would be substantially different (or even minutely different) even if you were trying to account for aerodynamics and all those other variables. the spin and shape and all of that is about affecting trajectory and aerodynamic profile on the horizontal axis. It would be difficult to measure and calculate for sure. As an extreme example, compare dropping a bullet and a feather. Make them the same mass if it pleases you. Physics says they will hit the ground at the same time, but we know they will not. The reasons they will not are the same reasons that a bullet shot out of a gun will hit the ground at a different time than the dropped bullet will. Significantly less differential than the bullet feather comparison, but different none the less. The same idea applies if the object being shot horizontally were a in the shape of a glider. There is no "lift" being generated by the object, except that lift being generated by the resistance of the air it travels through. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isleseeya Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 Dickcheney.com may have the answer ...if not you can still order bullets and barrels of oil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 Simple Elementary School Physics here. Since guns are evil, the bullet fired from the gun will be attacked and disintegrated by Global Warming before it hits the ground... the pacifist who dropped the bullet wins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 It would be difficult to measure and calculate for sure. As an extreme example, compare dropping a bullet and a feather. Make them the same mass if it pleases you. Physics says they will hit the ground at the same time, but we know they will not. The reasons they will not are the same reasons that a bullet shot out of a gun will hit the ground at a different time than the dropped bullet will. Significantly less differential than the bullet feather comparison, but different none the less. The same idea applies if the object being shot horizontally were a in the shape of a glider. There is no "lift" being generated by the object, except that lift being generated by the resistance of the air it travels through. yeah, i understand that two items with drastically different profiles, densities, etc. will fall at different rates outisde of a vacuum...i'm just not convinced that two items with exactly the same size, shape and mass (especially in this case with a very dense, low aerodynamic profile like a bullet) will fall at a markedly different rate if it's also moving horizontally. it may be the case that it is so, but i can't think of a good reason why and i certainly haven't seen a good reason offered yet in this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muck Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 The bullet shot out of a gun is falling parallel to the ground (i.e., the pointy end is facing the horizon). Like this: <========| The bullet dropped may be falling parallel to the ground, but it may be falling perpendicular to the ground (i.e., the pointy end may be facing down) ... which would make it more aerodynamic than the bullet that was shot that is falling parallel to the ground. Like this: _ || || || || || V Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
montster Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 Ignoring things like wind resistance is the reason I passed on a career in Physics for EE. i was two semesters away from my EE degree when i realized how much i hated it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 The bullet shot out of a gun is falling parallel to the ground (i.e., the pointy end is facing the horizon). Like this: <========| The bullet dropped may be falling parallel to the ground, but it may be falling perpendicular to the ground (i.e., the pointy end may be facing down) ... which would make it more aerodynamic than the bullet that was shot that is falling parallel to the ground. Like this: _ || || || || || V which would make a measurable difference if bullets were made of styrofoam and not lead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muck Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 which would make a measurable difference if bullets were made of styrofoam and not lead. There was no reference made to how far above this infinitely flat surface the gun was fired or the bullet dropped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 I am sure it has been explained already but to the layman I would think the bullet being dropped would hit the ground first because the other bullet is traveling straight with a lot of speed and then descends Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexgaddis Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 I am sure it has been explained already but to the layman I would think the bullet being dropped would hit the ground first because the other bullet is traveling straight with a lot of speed and then descends Couldn't this be akin to dropping a car from 100 ft. in the air and driving one off a platform at 100 MPH from 100ft. up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted January 2, 2008 Author Share Posted January 2, 2008 I am sure it has been explained already but to the layman I would think the bullet being dropped would hit the ground first because the other bullet is traveling straight with a lot of speed and then descends If you drive really fast, does gravity stop working on your car? Remind me not to take rides with Whomper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 If you drive really fast, does gravity stop working on your car? Remind me not to take rides with Whomper. just keep the windows rolled down and you'll probably be alright. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 <========| _ || || || || || V i hate it when this happens ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 (edited) If you drive really fast, does gravity stop working on your car? Remind me not to take rides with Whomper. I agree the bullet will eventually drop but not as fast as the one that has been vertically dropped. The shot one I assume goes parralel to the ground until the weight of the bullet is more then the speed ( I know that doesnt make sense but you know what I mean) If Randy Johnson throws a baseball and I stand next to him and drop one my ball is gonna hit the ground first..Unless there is some riddlesque loophole. Edited January 2, 2008 by whomper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 (edited) just keep the windows rolled down and you'll probably be alright. I am known to "Stop short" Edited January 2, 2008 by whomper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muck Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 I agree the bullet will eventually drop but not as fast as the one that has been vertically dropped. The shot one I assume goes parralel to the ground until the weight of the bullet is more then the speed ( I know that doesnt make sense but you know what I mean) If Randy Johnson throws a baseball and I stand next to him and drop one my ball is gonna hit the ground first..Unless there is some riddlesque loophole. Only if you drop the ball somewhere below his release point (or his pitch doesn't have a sinking action to it... and his thrown ball has neither an upward nor downwards trajectory upon release from his hand ... etc ... ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 If you drive really fast, does gravity stop working on your car? Remind me not to take rides with Whomper. Whomper was a big Dukes of Hazzard fan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 If the bullets are leaving from the same starting point and hitting the ground at the same time wouldnt they both land in the same spot ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
montster Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 Whomper was a big Dukes of Hazzard fan. in particular, he wanted to be like daisy duke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.