Pennock's Fiero Forum
  Totally O/T - Archive
  Sigh... what am I missing here? (basic physics problem)

T H I S   I S   A N   A R C H I V E D   T O P I C
  

Email This Page to Someone! | Printable Version


Sigh... what am I missing here? (basic physics problem) by wikid_one
Started on: 01-28-2009 11:23 PM
Replies: 14
Last post by: 86fierofun on 01-29-2009 01:57 PM
wikid_one
Member
Posts: 2838
From: Ocean City, MD
Registered: Dec 2003


Feedback score:    (8)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 59
Rate this member

Report this Post01-28-2009 11:23 PM Click Here to See the Profile for wikid_oneSend a Private Message to wikid_oneDirect Link to This Post
So my roommate asked me to look at a problem he was assigned, and for the life of me, I can't get it to make any sense. The problem is:

 
quote

The upward normal force exerted by the floor is 620N on an elevator passenger who weighs 650N. What is the magnitude of acceleration?

The more I look at this, the more I think there isn't enough information given. Am I missing something? This is driving me crazy.
IP: Logged
PFF
System Bot
Xerces_Blackthorne
Member
Posts: 6163
From: Mertztown PA
Registered: Mar 2008


Feedback score:    (26)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 160
Rate this member

Report this Post01-28-2009 11:41 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Xerces_BlackthorneSend a Private Message to Xerces_BlackthorneDirect Link to This Post
Edit: Use the formula A=F/M

A=620 N/650N
A=0.953 N

[This message has been edited by Xerces_Blackthorne (edited 01-29-2009).]

IP: Logged
Formula88
Member
Posts: 53788
From: Raleigh NC
Registered: Jan 2001


Feedback score: (3)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 554
Rate this member

Report this Post01-28-2009 11:45 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Formula88Send a Private Message to Formula88Direct Link to This Post
Do you assume 1g = -9.8m/s2?
That should give you enough information.

[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 01-28-2009).]

IP: Logged
Xerces_Blackthorne
Member
Posts: 6163
From: Mertztown PA
Registered: Mar 2008


Feedback score:    (26)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 160
Rate this member

Report this Post01-28-2009 11:53 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Xerces_BlackthorneSend a Private Message to Xerces_BlackthorneDirect Link to This Post
.

[This message has been edited by Xerces_Blackthorne (edited 01-29-2009).]

IP: Logged
Shyster
Member
Posts: 1085
From: Conroe, TX, USA
Registered: Aug 2005


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 58
Rate this member

Report this Post01-29-2009 12:06 AM Click Here to See the Profile for ShysterClick Here to visit Shyster's HomePageSend a Private Message to ShysterDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by wikid_one:
So my roommate asked me to look at a problem he was assigned, and for the life of me, I can't get it to make any sense. The problem is:

The upward normal force exerted by the floor is 620N on an elevator passenger who weighs 650N. What is the magnitude of acceleration?

The more I look at this, the more I think there isn't enough information given. Am I missing something? This is driving me crazy.


In the most simplistic Newtonian terms, Net F = ma. Net F = - 30N. m= mass of the passenger = 650N / (presumably) g.

(It's a poorly formulated question, one would normally provide the mass, not the "weight" of the passenger, as "weight" requires one to make an assumption regarding the environment.) If the elevator is close to the surface of the Earth, "g" is g (the accepted value for the acceleration due to Earth's gravity, near the surface.) Otherwise, you're on your own. Ignore the "minus" (the question asks for "magnitude", not direction), make a silly assumption, and plug two equations.

Since the questioner wants you to ignore frame-of-reference questions, you're probably good with ignoring coriolis effects, too, so you're off the hook there.

But it's still a poorly worded question, and no physicist would ask the question that way.
IP: Logged
ryan.hess
Member
Posts: 20784
From: Orlando, FL
Registered: Dec 2002


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 319
Rate this member

Report this Post01-29-2009 12:08 AM Click Here to See the Profile for ryan.hessSend a Private Message to ryan.hessDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by wikid_one:

The upward normal force exerted by the floor is 620N on an elevator passenger who weighs 650N. What is the magnitude of acceleration?


30N = force

mass = 650N / G

F=MA
A=?
IP: Logged
86fierofun
Member
Posts: 3650
From:
Registered: Aug 2004


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 62
Rate this member

Report this Post01-29-2009 12:09 AM Click Here to See the Profile for 86fierofunSend a Private Message to 86fierofunDirect Link to This Post


Don't show your roommate, otherwise that will be cheating. Feel free to coach him in the right direction though.

Nuts. Shyster gave the wordy version before I could scan the picture in.... Grrrr
IP: Logged
Xerces_Blackthorne
Member
Posts: 6163
From: Mertztown PA
Registered: Mar 2008


Feedback score:    (26)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 160
Rate this member

Report this Post01-29-2009 12:15 AM Click Here to See the Profile for Xerces_BlackthorneSend a Private Message to Xerces_BlackthorneDirect Link to This Post
Had the question asked for mass instead of weight, yes I probably could have figured it out...thats what really screws me up...

[This message has been edited by Xerces_Blackthorne (edited 01-29-2009).]

IP: Logged
Shyster
Member
Posts: 1085
From: Conroe, TX, USA
Registered: Aug 2005


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 58
Rate this member

Report this Post01-29-2009 12:19 AM Click Here to See the Profile for ShysterClick Here to visit Shyster's HomePageSend a Private Message to ShysterDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by 86fierofun:
Nuts. Shyster gave the wordy version before I could scan the picture in.... Grrrr


Sorry, but I'm good at wordy.
IP: Logged
86fierofun
Member
Posts: 3650
From:
Registered: Aug 2004


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 62
Rate this member

Report this Post01-29-2009 12:26 AM Click Here to See the Profile for 86fierofunSend a Private Message to 86fierofunDirect Link to This Post
I certainly understood it

Lets see if wikid_one follows now.....
IP: Logged
AntiKev
Member
Posts: 2333
From: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Registered: May 2004


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post01-29-2009 07:21 AM Click Here to See the Profile for AntiKevClick Here to visit AntiKev's HomePageSend a Private Message to AntiKevDirect Link to This Post
The question is testing if you know the difference between weight and mass...oh yeah...and if you know what Newton's 2nd law is.
IP: Logged
PFF
System Bot
KurtAKX
Member
Posts: 4008
From: West Bloomfield, MI
Registered: Feb 2002


Feedback score:    (9)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 128
Rate this member

Report this Post01-29-2009 08:01 AM Click Here to See the Profile for KurtAKXSend a Private Message to KurtAKXDirect Link to This Post
At least its not like the stupid problem that was going around the forums a year or two ago about "if a plane was on a conveyor belt that was moving backwards, could the plane still take off" or some foolishness like that.

EDIT: https://www.fiero.nl/forum/A...060811-6-038175.html

Can you believe it made it 11 pages?

...and it went on! 14 more pages!
https://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum6/HTML/053454.html

...and on!

https://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum6/HTML/053233.html

[This message has been edited by KurtAKX (edited 01-29-2009).]

IP: Logged
maryjane
Member
Posts: 70126
From: Copperas Cove Texas
Registered: Apr 2001


Feedback score: (4)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 436
Rate this member

Report this Post01-29-2009 08:32 AM Click Here to See the Profile for maryjaneSend a Private Message to maryjaneDirect Link to This Post
Tried a rubber band powered airplane on a highspeed conveyor belt myself, with the linear movement of the belt (Ft per min) running much much faster than the plane was ever capable of moving. Plane took off without a hitch. Wound the rubber band only half as tight the next time and it still went airborne with no problem.

I never did see what the big problem was understanding this.

[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 01-29-2009).]

IP: Logged
wikid_one
Member
Posts: 2838
From: Ocean City, MD
Registered: Dec 2003


Feedback score:    (8)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 59
Rate this member

Report this Post01-29-2009 10:40 AM Click Here to See the Profile for wikid_oneSend a Private Message to wikid_oneDirect Link to This Post
I guess I was just overthinking it.
I looked at it, and saw the downward force was larger than the normal force, so that means that there have to be two different accelerations. How do we know that the elevator is in freefall? Nothing in the question leads me to believe that the downward acceleration is 9.8 m/s2. Also, since the downward force is more than the normal force, that implies that the acceleration is downward, and thus the acceleration down should be greater. I started writing out my equations

Fn=620N=m*a1
Fg=650N=m*a2

I then looked at it and went... "hmmm. too many unknowns." And then, I confused myself.
IP: Logged
86fierofun
Member
Posts: 3650
From:
Registered: Aug 2004


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 62
Rate this member

Report this Post01-29-2009 01:57 PM Click Here to See the Profile for 86fierofunSend a Private Message to 86fierofunDirect Link to This Post
The downward acceleration due to GRAVITY ONLY is approximately 9.81m/s at sea level. It changes at different altitudes, but typically the change does not show up in the three significant figures used. So GENERALLY, 9.81 m/s is used as the acceleration due to gravity in all general physics problems. It is, at least, a good first approximation.
IP: Logged



All times are ET (US)

T H I S   I S   A N   A R C H I V E D   T O P I C
  

Contact Us | Back To Main Page

Advertizing on PFF | Fiero Parts Vendors
PFF Merchandise | Fiero Gallery
Real-Time Chat | Fiero Related Auctions on eBay



Copyright (c) 1999, C. Pennock