the movement of the projectile also demonstrates the validity of Newton's first law: the projectile is moving horizontally because of inertia, there is no force acting on it except gravity and so it reaches the ground at the same time as an object merely dropped from the same height
Beautifully explained as usual. I have taken college level calculus and physics, and always wanted the instructors to explain the concepts like this guy does, but all they wanted to do is show you the equations. I would guess that 90% of the students in my classes don't remember most, if not all that they learned. Jason should teach physics teachers how to teach physics!
Absolutely true on the affect of a projectile since in the military you have to adjust your front sight for every 100 meters of range to the target. Then you adjust the rear sight for windage. I have also heard it said that as people age they shrink due to the constant effects of gravity.
One way to model what is being observed is to conceive of all matter as being composed of arbitrarily small identical particles. I'm not talking about atoms or molecules, we don't need the complications of quantum physics here! Bigger objects have more particles so they are heavier. In denser materials the particles are clustered together more tightly so again more particles are present so objects of the same size are heavier. In this view when two objects fall together you have two collections of identical particles falling, collections of perhaps different numbers and concentrations of particles, but in essence just a lot of identical particles falling. Of course they will all fall together in exactly the same way, the bottom ones in each object all hitting the ground at the same time.
@A_Retired_MSgt Maybe. The mass at altitude would move only slightly slower though. The gravitational field on the ISS is approximately 89% as on the surface and it is at 400 km altitude. Use a linear approximation to determine your "maximum altitude" force of gravity.
Thanks but there is a VERY important concept that you have not included here! Which is Terminal Velocity! These little experiments did not fall far enough to establish Terminal velocity, but if they did the HEAVIER object Does fall faster!! (With equal air resistance) in other words a denser object falls faster (same shape at terminal velocity). We need to stop saying settling doesn’t depend on mass (see Stokes sedimentation it can be shown the heavier (denser) sphere falls faster. This undermines the gravitational framework
Yeah terminal velocity is important, but it is common to ignore other effects in physics to focus on what you are studying. So I ignored air resistance to focus on how gravity alone is acting, since the video was about gravity.
So if I take a us army m777 howitzer round (100kg) and droop it from waist height it will hit the ground at the same time as firing it to a range of 14 miles? I call bs on that
So the max range of 24140.16 meters at 827 meters per second max velocity is about a 30 second flight time I guarantee that dropping a 100kg round from a meter is not 30 seconds
@@MathAndScience If fired horizontally (tangent to the firing spot) at a distance of 14 miles, 22,5 km, you need to account for earth's curvature. Dropping/firing from 1 meter will give a curve drop of 28 meters. The dropped shell will absolutely hit the ground first. I used an earth curve calculator for that but I'm not sure it begins tangent to fire point or at horizon.
the movement of the projectile also demonstrates the validity of Newton's first law: the projectile is moving horizontally because of inertia, there is no force acting on it except gravity and so it reaches the ground at the same time as an object merely dropped from the same height
Definitely one of the best science teachers I have known. Thanks Jason.
Beautifully explained as usual. I have taken college level calculus and physics, and always wanted the instructors to explain the concepts like this guy does, but all they wanted to do is show you the equations. I would guess that 90% of the students in my classes don't remember most, if not all that they learned. Jason should teach physics teachers how to teach physics!
Absolutely true on the affect of a projectile since in the military you have to adjust your front sight for every 100 meters of range to the target. Then you adjust the rear sight for windage. I have also heard it said that as people age they shrink due to the constant effects of gravity.
Learning is very slowly hopefully surely percolator,Thanks.
One way to model what is being observed is to conceive of all matter as being composed of arbitrarily small identical particles. I'm not talking about atoms or molecules, we don't need the complications of quantum physics here! Bigger objects have more particles so they are heavier. In denser materials the particles are clustered together more tightly so again more particles are present so objects of the same size are heavier. In this view when two objects fall together you have two collections of identical particles falling, collections of perhaps different numbers and concentrations of particles, but in essence just a lot of identical particles falling. Of course they will all fall together in exactly the same way, the bottom ones in each object all hitting the ground at the same time.
Nice 👍
Conceptually, the surface of the Earth is accelerating upwards (or outwards) to meet the dropped objects at the same time. (General Relativity.)
Oh wait I know! The rate of fall is proportional to the mass of the object. However you would write that in mathematical notation.
My question is if anyone has determined whether an object drops at a different speed within a vacuum at maximum altitude versus at sea level.
@A_Retired_MSgt Maybe. The mass at altitude would move only slightly slower though. The gravitational field on the ISS is approximately 89% as on the surface and it is at 400 km altitude. Use a linear approximation to determine your "maximum altitude" force of gravity.
Your video is diluted by lies from ads
Thanks but there is a VERY important concept that you have not included here! Which is Terminal Velocity! These little experiments did not fall far enough to establish Terminal velocity, but if they did the HEAVIER object Does fall faster!! (With equal air resistance) in other words a denser object falls faster (same shape at terminal velocity). We need to stop saying settling doesn’t depend on mass (see Stokes sedimentation it can be shown the heavier (denser) sphere falls faster. This undermines the gravitational framework
Yeah terminal velocity is important, but it is common to ignore other effects in physics to focus on what you are studying. So I ignored air resistance to focus on how gravity alone is acting, since the video was about gravity.
Nope
Stokes law is about objects in a liquid, not in a vacumn.
Does inertial mass prove that gravity is a force?
Gravity is not a force; it's identical to and indistinguishable from acceleration.
@@Fitzrovialittergravity is still considered one of the fundamental forces.
😮 but I don't know 😞 English
But good 👍❤
So if I take a us army m777 howitzer round (100kg) and droop it from waist height it will hit the ground at the same time as firing it to a range of 14 miles? I call bs on that
Yep! No BS
So the max range of 24140.16 meters at 827 meters per second max velocity is about a 30 second flight time
I guarantee that dropping a 100kg round from a meter is not 30 seconds
the path of the projectile fired from a howitzer is upward so it would take longer to hit the ground than a shell dropped from waist height
@benperry490 you have never fired one of those projectiles completely flat.
@@MathAndScience If fired horizontally (tangent to the firing spot) at a distance of 14 miles, 22,5 km, you need to account for earth's curvature. Dropping/firing from 1 meter will give a curve drop of 28 meters. The dropped shell will absolutely hit the ground first.
I used an earth curve calculator for that but I'm not sure it begins tangent to fire point or at horizon.