Re: KE = ½ mv^2 is disproved in a new falling object impact test.

On Aug 19, 2:52 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Aug 19, 2:53 pm, Puppet_Sock <puppet_s...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:> On Aug 16, 9:36 pm,

NoEinstein <noeinst...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[snip]

Today, I ran a simple KE test. I dropped a ¾” dia. chrome steel ball
from a height of 3.3684 feet into a small flower pot full of just-
mixed artclay.

You expect people to believe you measured the height you
dropped this ball from to five significant digits?

Dear Puppet S.: The five significant digits is the rounded-off
"solution" to setting 1/2 mv^2 (sub chrome steel) = KE = 1/2 mv^2 (sub
PTFE fluoroplastic). The height of drop is found by determining the
TIME necessary for the falling objects to reach the "solution"
velocity. Then, the distance of fall necessary to reach such velocity
can be found by squaring the TIME (in seconds) and multiplying the
result by 16.087 feet of fall (in one second). The accuracy of my
fall distances was 1/16" plus or minus for the steel ball, and 1/4"
plus for the PTFE ball.

Ah, so you didn't drop the steel ball from a height of 3.3684 feet,
because your precision

was only 1 part in 500 and not 1 part in 33000.

You DO know how to quote measured values to appropriate precision with
an appropriate

uncertainty, don't you? Misquoting numbers is one reason you'll get
comments for revision

on an experimental paper.

So given your experimental uncertainty in the position of the drops
(and in the masses of

the ball, by the way), what is your percentage uncertainty in knowing
that the kinetic

energies are the same? Is it 0.2% or is it 5% or is it 25%? You DO
know how to calculate

that, don't you?

I intentionally made the fall distance of the
lighter ball greater to prevent any nit pickers from claining that
that 1/4" (less) had caused the greatly reduced penetrastion into the
clay.

For the record, the smaller ball would have had to be dropped from a
height of about 250 feet in order to make the same dent in the clay.

What's your experimental evidence for that?

12 feet of fall, as had satisfied Coriolis's equation doesn't even
come close to causing the KE needed.

Clearly you are some mixture of stupid, a liar, a troll, and insane.

I'll let history decide whether you are I come closer to your
"mixture".

That ball sank in close to its ‘equator’.

And you then expect people to accept "close to" as a measure
of penetration.

The clay is still soft. When it has dried hard, I will measure the
penetration. I wouldn't want anyone to accuse me of pressing that
steel ball deeper when I made the measurements.

Doesn't help document the precision with which you placed the balls'
heights initially,

does it?

Doesn't help document the masses of the balls, does it?


Clearly you are some mixture of stupid, a liar, a troll, and insane.

Clearly, you are in an echo chamber!

I immediately went up my outdoor staircase and dropped a ¾” dia. PTFE (a
heavy fluoroplastic ball, weighing .2807 times as much as the chrome
steel ball), from an exact height of 12 feet. The KE value should be .
10469323 for each ball. Note: 12 feet of drop = .745944d, where d =
16.087 feet, the distance of fall in one second. The time of fall is .
86368 seconds for the lighter ball.

It would appear to be all of the above. You have reported 8
significant
digits for KE, but with no units. And you expect people to believe you
have *measured* the time of fall of this ball to five significant
digits.

Units are unnecessary when one is comparing the relative penetration.
My "weights" were determined using a balance beam.

With what precision? What were the *measured* masses and mass
uncertainties for the two

balls?

All we're trying to do is get you to report your results the way a 7th
grader is taught to

do it.

I could have taken
the specific gravities of the balls and used that proportion. But
different materials have ranges of specific gravities. My balance
beam solution is very accurate, probably to 100th of a gram.

Probably? You need to either calibrate to be sure (and describe your
calibration

procedure) or determine the manufacturer's spec.




At some point you should consider returning to public school
and completing your arithmetic lessons. You are a clue free zone.
Socks


.

Relevant Pages