Author |
Topic: A Brick and A Tennis Ball (Physics) (Read 3553 times) |
|
Barukh
Uberpuzzler
Gender: 
Posts: 2276
|
 |
A Brick and A Tennis Ball (Physics)
« on: Jan 12th, 2004, 2:27am » |
 Quote  Modify
|
A brick falls from 1 meter height onto a tennis ball  . After collision, the brick bounces up 0.5 meter. To what height will the tennis ball bounce ?
|
|
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: A Brick and A Tennis Ball (Physics)
« Reply #1 on: Jan 12th, 2004, 4:40am » |
Quote Modify
|
that depends on a few things..
Is the tennisball secured to the ground? Does the brick bounce straight up, how much energy is lost in deformation of the tennisball, sound and heat (and perhaps even damage to the brick). What are the weights of the brick and the tennisball. What is the tennisball resting on. Was the tennisball even at rest when it was hit by the brick?
Supposing the brick falls straight down, and bounces straight up, is heavier than the tennisball, which also bounces straight up (and was at rest when hit), then the tennisball won't bounce higher than the brick since it'll bounce back down on hitting the brick above it, so 0.5 m
Of course this will give some very curious effects, seeying as when no energy leaves the system the tennisball and the brick will keep bouncing on each other and the floor (in which case momentum is kind of a problem since it need to be conserved, so energy must be lost through the floor, I think.. Unless the floor is infinitely heavy?! maybe.. )
|
| « Last Edit: Jan 12th, 2004, 4:41am by towr » |
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
Barukh
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 2276
|
|
Re: A Brick and A Tennis Ball (Physics)
« Reply #2 on: Jan 12th, 2004, 5:36am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 12th, 2004, 4:40am, towr wrote:that depends on a few things.
|
|
towr, I completely agree with you. What I have to say in my own defence is that - like usualy in such kind of questions - all abstractions/simplifications are assumed, if not stated differently.
So, the tennis ball is at rest on the the ground, there is no energy lost due to heat/deformation, the brick falls straight down and bounces straight up etc.
Quote:| ...tennisball and the brick will keep bouncing on each other and the floor |
|
The question is about the very first bounce.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: A Brick and A Tennis Ball (Physics)
« Reply #3 on: Jan 12th, 2004, 7:02am » |
Quote Modify
|
Well, I'm still hard pressed to answer without knowing the mass (or at least the ratio) between the brick and the tennis ball..
::The brick looses half it's energy to the ball (at the top it has half the potential energy compared to when it was dropped)
supposing mbrick=k*mtennisball, I would say the tennisball bounces to k*1/2 m, if it wasn't for the brick being in the way. If it is in the way, some of the kinetic energy of the ball is transferred back to the brick, which goes higher than without it (unless the ball is heavier than the brick) so the ball won't bounce higher than somewhere below the 1/2 meter mark::
Unless I'm missing something..
|
|
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
ThudnBlunder
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
The dewdrop slides into the shining Sea
Gender:
Posts: 4489
|
|
Re: A Brick and A Tennis Ball (Physics)
« Reply #4 on: Jan 12th, 2004, 7:25am » |
Quote Modify
|
Quote:| To what height will the tennis ball bounce ? |
|
William of Ockham's answer:It won't because it cracked while the brick was bouncing off it.
(But hang on, Bill has just noticed that this in in Medium!) 
If the brick is k times the weight of the tennis ball, off the top of his head he now gets k/2 metres.
(Still don't see why it's in Medium.)
|
| « Last Edit: Jan 16th, 2004, 5:54am by ThudnBlunder » |
IP Logged |
THE MEEK SHALL INHERIT THE EARTH.....................................................................er, if that's all right with the rest of you.
|
|
|
Barukh
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 2276
|
|
Re: A Brick and A Tennis Ball (Physics)
« Reply #5 on: Jan 16th, 2004, 4:16am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 12th, 2004, 7:25am, THUDandBLUNDER wrote:| Still don't see why it's in Medium. |
|
Where do you think it should be?
OK, let me present the solution I know – in hope it will initiate some discussion 
[smiley=blacksquare.gif]
When the brick starts bouncing after the collision, its speed equals the speed of the topmost point of the tennis ball – let denote it by v. Using the law of conservation of mechanical energy, we get that it will bounce to the height hB = v2/2g.
After the collision and before leaving the ground, consider the tennis ball to be a perfect string. When it starts bouncing, the speed of its center of gravity is v/2, so it will reach the height hT = hB / 4.
Not only the answer is independent of mass, it doesn't depend on the original brick's height.
[smiley=blacksquare.gif]
|
| « Last Edit: Jan 16th, 2004, 4:22am by Barukh » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
rmsgrey
Uberpuzzler
    
Gender:
Posts: 2873
|
|
Re: A Brick and A Tennis Ball (Physics)
« Reply #6 on: Jan 22nd, 2004, 8:44am » |
Quote Modify
|
I'm not convinced by Barukh's analysis - it seems to assume that, at the time when the brick loses contact with the ball, it is the exact instant when the ball finishes decompressing, and that the ball is still in contact with the ground at that point. As the tennis ball has to account for half the energy in the system (since there's nowhere else for it to go by assumption, and the brick ends up with half) it must still be compressed when it loses contact with the brick. There's a contradiction looming, but I don't have time to explore it fully. Suffice to say that the problem statement describes an unphysical situation except for tennis balls lighter heavier than the brick and h greater than two ball radii
|
| « Last Edit: Jan 24th, 2004, 4:37am by rmsgrey » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Sameer
Uberpuzzler
Pie = pi * e
Gender:
Posts: 1261
|
|
Re: A Brick and A Tennis Ball (Physics)
« Reply #7 on: Jan 22nd, 2004, 11:21am » |
Quote Modify
|
Actually using law of conservation of energy I get
height of ball = (mass of brick)/(2 * mass of ball)
The flaw in your arguement is that you have assume that velocity of ball to be same as that of brick which would be false and that the velocity equivalent of energy would depend on ball's mass.
|
|
IP Logged |
"Obvious" is the most dangerous word in mathematics.
--Bell, Eric Temple
Proof is an idol before which the mathematician tortures himself.
Sir Arthur Eddington, quoted in Bridges to Infinity
|
|
|
rmsgrey
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 2873
|
|
Re: A Brick and A Tennis Ball (Physics)
« Reply #8 on: Jan 23rd, 2004, 7:14am » |
Quote Modify
|
the brick only accelerates upwards while in contact with the top of the ball, so when they separate, the brick and the top of the ball must have the same velocity...
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
aero_guy
Senior Riddler
Gender:
Posts: 513
|
|
Re: A Brick and A Tennis Ball (Physics)
« Reply #9 on: Jan 23rd, 2004, 12:01pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Barukh's reasoning seems correct (with a lot of assumptions). It has the interesting effect that you can identify the mass of the tennis ball. From conservation of energy we see that mbrickhb=mballhball so that the final energy equals the energy of the brick inititally.
This tells us that the tennis ball weighs four times as much as the brick, or the assumptions in the problem are false. That is one hell of a tennis ball.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Sameer
Uberpuzzler
Pie = pi * e
Gender:
Posts: 1261
|
|
Re: A Brick and A Tennis Ball (Physics)
« Reply #10 on: Jan 23rd, 2004, 4:07pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 23rd, 2004, 12:01pm, aero_guy wrote:| Barukh's reasoning seems correct (with a lot of assumptions). . |
|
Please Explain!!!
|
|
IP Logged |
"Obvious" is the most dangerous word in mathematics.
--Bell, Eric Temple
Proof is an idol before which the mathematician tortures himself.
Sir Arthur Eddington, quoted in Bridges to Infinity
|
|
|
KarmaBandit
Newbie
Gender:
Posts: 16
|
|
Re: A Brick and A Tennis Ball (Physics)
« Reply #11 on: Jan 23rd, 2004, 6:48pm » |
Quote Modify
|
My two cents:
I would put towr's original response of "k * (1/2) meters" on a Freshman physics test, though I would expect to see something more like Barukh's analysis in real life.
Barukh's analysis takes into account the loss of energy during the collision in a neat way, though the "perfect string" approximation will probably only give you a rough estimate of real life.
Also:
> "From conservation of energy we see that mbrickhb=mballhball "
I don't see any reason for that to be true. Why do they have the same final energy?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
rmsgrey
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 2873
|
|
Re: A Brick and A Tennis Ball (Physics)
« Reply #12 on: Jan 24th, 2004, 4:33am » |
Quote Modify
|
Barukh's second post explicitly rules out energy loss to heat/deformation, so, unless a significant amount ends up as sound or something, the kinetic + gravitational potential energy of ball and brick after collision must equal the intial g.p.e. or the brick.
Since the brick bounces to half its initial height, it ends up with half the energy. so the tennis ball must have the other half. Bouncing to a quarter the height of the brick, it must therefore have four times the mass.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Sameer
Uberpuzzler
Pie = pi * e
Gender:
Posts: 1261
|
|
Re: A Brick and A Tennis Ball (Physics)
« Reply #13 on: Jan 29th, 2004, 9:47am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 24th, 2004, 4:33am, rmsgrey wrote:| Bouncing to a quarter the height of the brick, it must therefore have four times the mass. |
|
According to Barukh's post, a ball of any mass will bounce to quarter the height!!!!
According to rmsgrey, since it bounces to quarter the height, its mass is 4 times.
Still waiting for towr's explanation!!!!
|
|
IP Logged |
"Obvious" is the most dangerous word in mathematics.
--Bell, Eric Temple
Proof is an idol before which the mathematician tortures himself.
Sir Arthur Eddington, quoted in Bridges to Infinity
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: A Brick and A Tennis Ball (Physics)
« Reply #14 on: Jan 29th, 2004, 2:25pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 29th, 2004, 9:47am, Sameer wrote:
Still waiting for towr's explanation!!!! |
|
I don't really have a differing view..
aero_guy and rmsgrey have explaned it well enough imo.
The constraints of the problem make it so you needn't know the mass of the ball, as there is only one possibility for it.
|
|
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
lucierty
Guest
|
 |
Re: A Brick and A Tennis Ball (Physics)
« Reply #15 on: Apr 26th, 2004, 2:12am » |
Quote Modify
 Remove
|
           HOW WOULD I KNOW IM TRYING TO DO A PROJECT ON WETHER HEAT AFFECTS THE HEIGHT OF THE BOUNCE OF THE TENNIS BALL.  
|
| « Last Edit: Apr 26th, 2004, 3:50pm by Icarus » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Icarus
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Boldly going where even angels fear to tread.
Gender:
Posts: 4863
|
|
Re: A Brick and A Tennis Ball (Physics)
« Reply #16 on: Apr 26th, 2004, 4:20pm » |
Quote Modify
|
lucierty:
1) Please stop screaming and punching everything in sight! Perhaps it's time for your medications?
2) Theoretically, there are small changes in the overall velocity of the ball due to heat exchange between it and the floor that it bounces from. These exchanges can go either way, sometimes increasing the velocity of ball, sometimes decreasing it - on average not changing it, assuming the ball and floor at the same temperature. However, for a large object like a ball, these effects are below our ability to measure. For molecules they are substantial.
There is another affect of temperature, though. As the temperature increases, the material properties of both ball and floor change. My guess is that as temperature rises, hardness of both will decrease, resulting in more inelastic collisions, and thus as temperature rises, the ball will not bounce as high.
|
|
IP Logged |
"Pi goes on and on and on ...
And e is just as cursed.
I wonder: Which is larger
When their digits are reversed? " - Anonymous
|
|
|
|
RIDDLES SITE
WRITE MATH!
Home 
Help 
Search 
Members 
Login 
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print