Roger Dynamic Motion Posted May 8, 2017 Posted May 8, 2017 I met , the time is relative to the object falling in vacuum.
Strange Posted May 8, 2017 Posted May 8, 2017 I met , the time is relative to the object falling in vacuum. Still not making much sense. There is no obvious relationship between the rate of fall in a vacuum and in a medium where the terminal velocity becomes significant.
Sriman Dutta Posted May 9, 2017 Posted May 9, 2017 Senseless talks is no science at all. If you don't believe, try it.
Sooryakiran Posted June 7, 2017 Posted June 7, 2017 We know the fact that force due to gravity is F1=GMm/r^2 Now subtract your constant air drag from it, say F2 The net force is F=F1-F2 =GMm/r^2 - F2 Now to get acceleration , divide by m a = GM/r^2 - F2/m This is dependent upon mass Heavier the mass, less retarding effect, faster the object falls down.
J.C.MacSwell Posted June 15, 2017 Posted June 15, 2017 The air resistance is not a constant. For identical shapes the drag will be proportional to the square of the velocity, assuming the coefficient of drag does not change. If it does you must factor that in. The only point where the velocity will be the same is at the start, when dropped. The lighter object will otherwise accelerate more slowly but reach it's terminal velocity earlier, at a lower velocity.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now