A professor anthony correction for 2/15/06

[TreeFortRichard]

I was just catching the replay on my portable...I couldn't find a correction here, but i don't want any wackbaggers getting peppered...
Anthony stated that the shotgun pellets slow as they arrive back to earth, after being shot in the air. Well, all objects, when sent away from earth at a velocity return via gravity to the same point with the same velocity, because gravity is constant.
I laymans...Gravity pulls on things. If you shoot away from the earth gravity immediately begins slowing the pelllets with it's pull. When those pellets reach their peak they begin falling back towards earth and gravity then increases their velocity equivalent to the exact amount it decreased their speed on the way up....

I took physics in college...I's is smaht.

[WOWmagnet]

Nothing on Earth can fall faster than 32 feet per second (without another influence).

I know a thing or two about a thing or two...

[Bozack]

Well then you forgot a little thing called "terminal velocity" which dictates the maximum velocity a falling body can attain in a free fall due to gravity. In other words, the pellets falling back to earth can only get to a certain speed due to gravity which may or may not be equal to their inital upward velocity.

For example, if you shot a wad of paper in the air with high explosives at a rate of 500 miles-per-hour, no matter how high that paper wad went, it would not reach 500 miles-per-hour upon its decent. Not even close. The same goes for bullets, birdshot, human bodies, etc.

THAT's physics, shitdick.

[SOS]

You forgot air resistance. Air resistance will slow down the pellets do to friction.

That would be true in a vacuum.

Also, earth is curved so the curvature would affect it's landing. So would its spin.

Terminal Velocity for a small object like a rain drop is 76 m/s.

[WOWmagnet]

...or 32 fps, even....:rolleyes:

[TreeFortRichard]

Well then you forgot a little thing called "terminal velocity" which dictates the maximum velocity a falling body can attain in a free fall due to gravity. In other words, the pellets falling back to earth can only get to a certain speed due to gravity which may or may not be equal to their inital upward velocity.

For example, if you shot a wad of paper in the air with high explosives at a rate of 500 miles-per-hour, no matter how high that paper wad went, it would not reach 500 miles-per-hour upon its decent. Not even close. The same goes for bullets, birdshot, human bodies, etc.

THAT's physics, shitdick.


Yeah...Um...we're talking about bullets...Shot...Not paper..OBVIOUSLY things have air resistance, however the air resistance of a lead sphere is much less than that of paper. Shot is going to still be moving very fast and be very dangerous when it gets back to earth. They have had a lot of calls from the south lately and i don't want some moron getting killed trying to catch pellets.

[R.BuddDwyer]

32 is acceleration due to gravity, not velocity. ACCELERATION is measured in ft per second per second (ft/s^2).

[DoughBoy]

TreeFort is correct. Although the pellets won't be going the 800fps that they left the muzzle of the weapon, I promise tha they'll be going fast enough to fuck you up more than just someone throwing a handfull of gravel at you.

And yes, I did send in an instant feedback, but he didn't read it.

[TheICON]

SHHHH!!! Don't correct him! He's going to Ban you! Don't make Adolf Anthony angry, sir! :icon_frow

[TreeFortRichard]

TreeFort is correct. Although the pellets won't be going the 800fps that they left the muzzle of the weapon, I promise tha they'll be going fast enough to fuck you up more than just someone throwing a handfull of gravel at you.

And yes, I did send in an instant feedback, but he didn't read it.
You're my boy...Doughboy...I thought someone must have said something.

[Frankie_Ballz]

32 feet per second / per second is actually the acceleration of a falling body due to gravity, the only thing that influences terminal velocity is the actual shape of the object.

[MinkusDominkus]

The pellets falling back to earth from a shot straight in the air would not be enough to do serious damage, they dont have the mass or velocity to pierce the skin, let alone go through the skull or muscle tissue.

Mythbusters did the whole penny off the empire state building thing, and although the penny would create more air resistance than the pellets, the penny has more mass. I believe the a penny and a pellet falling at their respective terminal velocities would do about the same damage, which is little to no damage, maybe a bump or 2 on the head.

[ROONT]

e=mc2 motherfuckers

[TENNECNOTE]

All objects, when sent away from earth at a velocity return via gravity to the same point w/ the same velocity= FALSE

[kvuo]

i have been hit by falling #8 birdshot, which I intentionally shot 90 degrees right straight up to do the experiment myself a few years ago.. it's harder than you might expect to even get hit by a pellet that way .. they all seem to fall around you in a 20 foot circle and rarely hit you... it doesn't do jack shit.. ant had it about right, it feels like a hailstone (if you can even get hit by one). btw, typical sport 12 ga load leaves the muzzle over 1000 fps, not 800..

[DoughBoy]

i have been hit by falling #8 birdshot, which I intentionally shot 90 degrees right straight up to do the experiment myself a few years ago.. it's harder than you might expect to even get hit by a pellet that way .. they all seem to fall around you in a 20 foot circle and rarely hit you... it doesn't do jack shit.. ant had it about right, it feels like a hailstone (if you can even get hit by one). btw, typical sport 12 ga load leaves the muzzle over 1000 fps, not 800..

Cheney was using a 28ga with birdshot, not 12 or 20.

[BuffaloPaul]

I was just catching the replay on my portable...I couldn't find a correction here, but i don't want any wackbaggers getting peppered...
Anthony stated that the shotgun pellets slow as they arrive back to earth, after being shot in the air. Well, all objects, when sent away from earth at a velocity return via gravity to the same point with the same velocity, because gravity is constant.
I laymans...Gravity pulls on things. If you shoot away from the earth gravity immediately begins slowing the pelllets with it's pull. When those pellets reach their peak they begin falling back towards earth and gravity then increases their velocity equivalent to the exact amount it decreased their speed on the way up....

I took physics in college...I's is smaht.


Not again... How come I sense this discussion is going to cause Stalker Patty to fling beanie babies into the air to prove gravity once again. :icon_wink

[TENNECNOTE]

Try it on a boat on a calm day, easy to see where they land

[ISUCK]

God damn you smart mother fuckers makin my head hurt

[PopeDX]

Do you have a microphone in front of you, shitdick?

Didn't think so! :action-sm :clap:

[stevethrower]

Actually the muzzle velocity would be higher...

http://www.chuckhawks.com/shotgun_recoil_table.htm

[jerseyrob]

i have been hit by falling #8 birdshot, which I intentionally shot 90 degrees right straight up to do the experiment myself a few years ago.. it's harder than you might expect to even get hit by a pellet that way .. they all seem to fall around you in a 20 foot circle and rarely hit you... it doesn't do jack shit.. ant had it about right, it feels like a hailstone (if you can even get hit by one). btw, typical sport 12 ga load leaves the muzzle over 1000 fps, not 800..
Definitely not the kind of test you want to perform when you're not exactly sure what's gonna happen.

[TreeFortRichard]

i have been hit by falling #8 birdshot, which I intentionally shot 90 degrees right straight up..


...see, Ant has to be careful what he says on the radio becuase there are people who will intentionally expose themselves to ordinance...

All objects, when sent away from earth at a velocity return via gravity to the same point w/ the same velocity= FALSE



OK...I was making reference to things that would hurt if say...they were thrown or SHOT at you. A baseball, a Brick, a can of chunk light tuna in water (Not oil, that is just nasty). I know that things like feathers, fleas, pubes would all fall at a dramatically reduced rate, but again I am talking about solid objects with a low degree of surface drag and a relevant mass.

[generoso]

Not again... How come I sense this discussion is going to cause Stalker Patty to fling beanie babies into the air to prove gravity once again. :icon_wink
Dam thats what I was gonna post..

[Don West]

Anthony actually made another minor mistake but it's so nitpicky that you can't hold it against Professor Anthony. He said that if you shot shotgun pellets up on the moon that they would only hit with 1/6 the force on the way back down. Since there is no atmosphere on the moon, only the moon's gravity would slow the pellets down, not wind resistance. So first of all the pellets would go farther up than they would if the moon had an atmosphere similar to that of the earth. Then on the way back down, since there is no atmosphere, there is no wind resistance to make the pellets hit terminal velocity. Therefore the pellets would keep accelerating downward until they hit the groung or the person who took the shots.

Also, just to show where the moon's gravity being 1/6th as strong as the earth's gravity comes from, the force due to gravity is given by F = Gm1m2 / r^2 where G is a constant equal to 6.67x10^-11 Nm^2/kg^2, m1 is the mass of one object, m2 is the mass of the other object, and r is the distance between the two masses. The mass of earth is 5.98x10^24 kg and its mean radius is 6.37x10^6 m. The mass of the moon is 7.35x10^22 kg and the mean radius is 1.74x10^6 m.

Let's say you want to find the force due to gravity on a 10 kg mass on both earth and the moon. On earth the force would be equal to
F = (6.67x10^-11 Nm^2/kg^2 x 5.98x10^24 m x 10 kg) / (6.37x10^6 m)^2
F = 98.2 Newtons

On the moon it would be
F = (6.67x10^-11 Nm^2/kg^2 x 7.35x10^22 kg x 10 kg) / (1.74x10^6m)^2
F = 16.2 Newtons

Divide the force on earth by the force on the moon
98.2 N / 16.2N = 6
The force of gravity is 6 times greater on the earth than is is on the moon. The force is a result of both the masses of the two objects and the distance between the two object. Sorry, Jimmy, it has nothing to do with the rotation.

Just for the sake of it, the sun which is thousands of times more massive than the earth and whose gravity is thousands of times that of the earth only spins once about its axis every month, whereas the earth obviously does every day.

[TENNECNOTE]

I was about to type that Don

[BillyDubbs]

I used to work at a gun club. There was a course in the woods, and then basic skeet and trap. while in the woods I was peppered on more than one occasion. It stings, but it does not break skin. pellets have very little weight, and have a low terminal velocity. Also they would have been using steel pellets and not lead, so they may have been lighter depending on the size of the shot

[TreeFortRichard]

I would bet that shot gun pellets would achieve escape velocity if shot straight off the moon...

[Don West]

And here's another interesting tidbit of information. Since the earth is rotating, due to the centripetal acceleration, the earth slightle bulges at the equator (this same force would make you weigh less if the earth had the same shape but was not rotating, just as Anthony mentioned on the program) and it is kind of squished down at the north and south poles so that the earth is kind of like an oval. Therefore, since you would be closer to the earth's center of mass at the north or south pole than you would at the equator, you would weigh more at one of the pole than you would at the equator. The rotation of the earth would slightly make you weigh less as well but its effect is negligible.

[Don West]

I would bet that shot gun pellets would achieve escape velocity if shot straight off the moon...
I wouldn't be surprised if they did.

[z2uantuM]

I was just catching the replay on my portable...I couldn't find a correction here, but i don't want any wackbaggers getting peppered...
Anthony stated that the shotgun pellets slow as they arrive back to earth, after being shot in the air. Well, all objects, when sent away from earth at a velocity return via gravity to the same point with the same velocity, because gravity is constant.
I laymans...Gravity pulls on things. If you shoot away from the earth gravity immediately begins slowing the pelllets with it's pull. When those pellets reach their peak they begin falling back towards earth and gravity then increases their velocity equivalent to the exact amount it decreased their speed on the way up....

I took physics in college...I's is smaht.

You neglected air resistance, which is reasonable at times, but definitely not in this situation. When you are shooting something out of a gun its already well past its terminal velocity, so it instantly starts slowing down. Just because it went out of the gun very fast, doesn't mean its terminal velocity is that fast, or that it will come back down at the same speed.

Nothing on Earth can fall faster than 32 feet per second (without another influence).

I know a thing or two about a thing or two...

STFU you idiot.

Mythbusters did the whole penny off the empire state building thing, and although the penny would create more air resistance than the pellets, the penny has more mass. I believe the a penny and a pellet falling at their respective terminal velocities would do about the same damage, which is little to no damage, maybe a bump or 2 on the head.

The penny started to spin on mythbusters though, and caused more air resistance. Regardless, you're right. The bullet would not harm you on the way back down.

[TreeFortRichard]

.... but its effect is negligible.
Not on these 2 waifs

http://www.dirtyflower.com/wp-content/lindsayandnicoleee.jpg

[BillyDubbs]

Quick question: On the moon would the pellets speed be enough to acheive escape velocity. given the lower gravity, and the lack of air resistence?

slow on the refresh please disregard.

they are definitely traveling faster than speed of sound.

[BillyDubbs]

Speaking of peppered, anyone see Meet the Creeps vol 1

[Iron Duke]

Even Einstein was wrong about that theory of relativity thing. You know all that about not being able to travel faster then light.

[TreeFortRichard]

Even Einstein was wrong about that theory of relativity thing. You know all that about not being able to travel faster then light.
I believe you are quoting directly from the thesis there...

One thing I am sure of is that we all need microphones!

[Don West]

Escape speed is given by
v = ((2GM) / R)^1/2
Where G is the gravitational constant again, M is the mass of the planet, and R is the Radius of the planet. So on the moon it would be
v = ((2 x 6.67x10^-11 x 7.35x10^22 kg) / 1.74x10^6m)^1/2
v = 2373.8 m/s
Which is equal to 7788 feet/second or 5310 mph. When a bullet comes out of a gun's barrell it's travelling about 900 feet/second and it may be lower when your talking about a shotgun. So no, the pellets would not exceed the escape velocity of the moon.

[Beeman99]

umm, if anyone is dumb enough to stand under shotgun pellets on purpose as they are falling from the sky, maybe the deserve a bit of personal injury for being so damn stupid

[Shipwreck]

I was once hit by a snowball

[BillyDubbs]

I have been hit by falling pellets, it is not that bad. It doesn't break skin at all.

[WoodenPlank]

Never ceases to amaze me how fucking smart (or damn good at fast research) some Wackbaggers are. I totally forgot about terminal velocity, too, when I started reading this. However, on the moon, wouldn't the pellets theoretically eventually stop accelerating because the gravitational field wasn't strong enough to give them additional velocity(assuming they hit 0 velocity far enough from the surface)? Or am I a fucko that's misremembering his High School physics class?



Edit: Actually, I think the theory of relativity says you cannot ACCELERATE to the speed of light. You can come within a hairs width of C, but not actually reach it. Technical difference. Bending space and/or time changes that, though. The thesis also states time likely stops if you achieve the speed of light.

[Don West]

Never ceases to amaze me how fucking smart (or damn good at fast research) some Wackbaggers are. I totally forgot about terminal velocity, too, when I started reading this. However, on the moon, wouldn't the pellets theoretically eventually stop accelerating because the gravitational field wasn't strong enough to give them additional velocity(assuming they hit 0 velocity far enough from the surface)? Or am I a fucko that's misremembering his High School physics class?
If its initial velocity was 2300 m/s or more, then yes that would be correct. Any less and it would still be sufficiently under the influence of the moons gravity to pull it back down.

[TreeFortRichard]

Never ceases to amaze me how fucking smart (or damn good at fast research) some Wackbaggers are. I totally forgot about terminal velocity, too, when I started reading this. However, on the moon, wouldn't the pellets theoretically eventually stop accelerating because the gravitational field wasn't strong enough to give them additional velocity(assuming they hit 0 velocity far enough from the surface)? Or am I a fucko that's misremembering his High School physics class?
I think i get what you are asking...No, the pellets on the moon would arrive at barrel height at the EXACT same speed as they left the barrel, b/c of no drag, term veloc. etc. Even the wadding from the shell would go out and back. NOW how cool would that be to see!!!

[Don West]

I think i get what you are asking...No, the pellets on the moon would arrive at barrel height at the EXACT same speed as they left the barrel, b/c of no drag, term veloc. etc. Even the wadding from the shell would go out and back. NOW how cool would that be to see!!!
Wackbag roadtrip to the moon to shoot off some shotgun shells!!!

[TreeFortRichard]

If some douche even brings up firing a shotgun in space w/out Oxygen...WHY I oughtta....

[patbattlefield]

...my brain hurts

[Garm]

well, I guess the next logical question is if traveling at the speed of light is possible, or was Einstein right in saying its impossible b/c of infinite mass as an object approaches the speed of light.....

[TreeFortRichard]

well, I guess the next logical question is if traveling at the speed of light is possible, or was Einstein right in saying its impossible b/c of infinite mass as an object approaches the speed of light.....
My thought is that Einsteins theory was applicable to our known universe...As you approach the speed of light/infinite mass you obey the rules of our universe...but who knows...maybe a little bit slips through to another and bam you are surpassing the speed of light...But then you cant see anything :( so what is the point of going faster than light if there is no possible way to detect that you are going faster than light! What would you measure your speed with? RIght?

[Iron Duke]

well, I guess the next logical question is if traveling at the speed of light is possible, or was Einstein right in saying its impossible b/c of infinite mass as an object approaches the speed of light.....


Wrong sir, on Star Trek they travel many times faster then the speed of light. And we all know that everything on Star Trek will come true. So there poopyhead.......;p

[TreeFortRichard]

Wrong sir, on Star Trek they travel many times faster then the speed of light. And we all know that everything on Star Trek will come true. So there poopyhead.......;p
Great now whoppie goldberg is going to go back in time to irritate Samuel Clemens...

[Mooseman]

Don't forget about the spinning guys!

[dropdead]

what's the matter? you kids ain't up on your string theory? and btw - didn't scientists accelerate some type of particle faster than the speed of light a few years back? so it is actually feasible for things to exceed the speed of light. i don't know what this adds to the conversation, i just wanted to feel smart too.

[Garm]

My thought is that Einsteins theory was applicable to our known universe...As you approach the speed of light/infinite mass you obey the rules of our universe...but who knows...maybe a little bit slips through to another and bam you are surpassing the speed of light...But then you cant see anything :( so what is the point of going faster than light if there is no possible way to detect that you are going faster than light! What would you measure your speed with? RIght?

Do you think you would enter another "dimension"?

[bundle of joy]

Not shure if anyone else caught this, but the word is centripital force, no f in centripital. Sorry professor.

[Garm]

what's the matter? you kids ain't up on your string theory? and btw - didn't scientists accelerate some type of particle faster than the speed of light a few years back? so it is actually feasible for things to exceed the speed of light. i don't know what this adds to the conversation, i just wanted to feel smart too.

It doesn't add anything, I guess I just wanted to feel smart too.

[TreeFortRichard]

Quite possibly...I still want to know how you measure the speed of something going faster than light, outside of a calculation...Why do i feel like this is going to somehow be on an episode of Numb3rs...

[ChrisC_EIT]

Well... Nothing you shoot into the sky will come down with the same velocity. Never. The air resistance going up and down guarantees that. While it’s likely that any “shotgun blast” (including bird and other shot) will reach terminal velocity by the time that it reaches earth again, it’s unlikely that the shot would necessarily produce grand injury in the victim. I do not know exactly what the shot size or load was, but I’ve been hit with shot before and while it “hurt” it didn’t break skin and mostly was just annoying.

Let’s not forget that the Professor has some experience with shotguns. It’s not just him talking about his ass about what he saw three years ago on Discovery.

Point was that Cheney’s friend wasn’t “peppered” but was SHOT.

[Garm]

Quite possibly...I still want to know how you measure the speed of something going faster than light, outside of a calculation...Why do i feel like this is going to somehow be on an episode of Numb3rs...

Hmmm.... If you send a particle accross a room faster then the speed of light, shouldn't it get there before you even launch it?

[jpc165]

well, I guess the next logical question is if traveling at the speed of light is possible, or was Einstein right in saying its impossible b/c of infinite mass as an object approaches the speed of light.....

But if you were able to creae a stable worm hole, you could arrive at another place in the universe, possibly light years away, in a fraction of the time traveling directly to that point. And then theres the warp drive theory. Both theories go around the dilemma of mass inceasing as you approach the speed of light.

[Garm]

Are you insane?
If you drop a cannon ball off a building will it hit the ground at a slower speed than a cannon ball fired from a cannon up to the hight of the building, arching, and returning to the ground?

Your theory would have the fired cannon ball hitting the ground with at the same velocity it left the cannon at! RE-fucking-diculous.

Wouldn't the cannon ball fired on top of the building hit the ground at a higher velocity b/c it has more time on its way down to pick up speed? I think a falling object on earth accelerates at 32 fps ^2^2... I think

[Angry typng guy]

Anyone care to comment on Ant's theory of the airfoil effect generated by the hog bulge of male lugers? According to fluid dynamics, the air will increase in velocity as it passes over resulting in a localized low pressure zone = lift. This will reduce friction on the runners which will increase speed. However, I believe it would negatively impact turn-in ability and control. Also, depending on the size of the hog, the air stream may detach sufficiently high enough to smooth flow over the helmet (the one covering his face) reducing drag. I'll need to listen to the replay again but I think Ant said it would act like a reversed airfoil on a race car that generates negative lift or "downforce". Or is this another thread...

[scolieoppie]

ok u guys have way to much time on your hands. but what if jimmy was spining in place and the moon was in the 3rd phase would the pellets reflect off of him and shoot ferell

http://starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov/Images/StarChild/solar_system_level1/solar_system.gif


www.myspace.com/scolieoppie

[TreeFortRichard]

Are you insane?
If you drop a cannon ball off a building will it hit the ground at a slower speed than a cannon ball fired from a cannon up to the hight of the building, arching, and returning to the ground?

Your theory would have the fired cannon ball hitting the ground with at the same velocity it left the cannon at! RE-fucking-diculous.
Okkk if the ball peaks at the building height then yes they will hit the ground at the same speed. But a 'wicked aerodynamic' projectile (discounting all the wind crap) if fired straight up at 800m/s will come back down and hit the barrel at 800m/s because the + and - effects of gravity cancel out, decreasing velocity on the way up at the same rate as it increases velocity on the way down...
Now i don't know if you heard the show today WBL :icon_wink But Professor said "Peppered is when you fire off your round. the blast goes up and the pellets fall down and hit you. There is no velocity left from the actual shotgun blast from the gun powder. The only velocity is now gravity...." (MyFi)
The point of my ned nitpicker post was that ALL of the velocity is due to the shotgun blast because the pellets had a velocity that was + (up) from the barrel that had gravity acting on it - (down) and then they hit a peak where then the - gravity of up is now a + force accelerating the pellets back to the barrel. If a player throws a baseball straight up at 90mph it will fall back down and be going 90mph when it reaches the height he let it go. Gravity is constant and the principle applies to the shotgun pellets as well, (but the wind restistance steals a lot of the velocity..)
WBL ROCKS :)

[TreeFortRichard]

Anyone care to comment on Ant's theory of the airfoil effect generated by the hog bulge of male lugers? According to fluid dynamics, the air will increase in velocity as it passes over resulting in a localized low pressure zone = lift. This will reduce friction on the runners which will increase speed. However, I believe it would negatively impact turn-in ability and control. Also, depending on the size of the hog, the air stream may detach sufficiently high enough to smooth flow over the helmet (the one covering his face) reducing drag. I'll need to listen to the replay again but I think Ant said it would act like a reversed airfoil on a race car that generates negative lift or "downforce". Or is this another thread...
Plus you have to worry about Hog resonance and the whole luge breaking apart...

[Garm]

But if you were able to creae a stable worm hole, you could arrive at another place in the universe, possibly light years away, in a fraction of the time traveling directly to that point. And then theres the warp drive theory. Both theories go around the dilemma of mass inceasing as you approach the speed of light.

now we just need to figure out how to take 2 points in the space/time fabric, pinch them together and then travel through it. WOW we got alot of fucken work ahead of us!

[Angry typng guy]

In rare instances Hog Resonance may interfere with the frequency of a vibrating super string resulting in time travel

[TreeFortRichard]

In rare instances Hog Resonance may interfere with the frequency of a vibrating super string resulting in time travel
I believe this is the story line behind back to the future 4

[Deadbent]

Try it on a boat on a calm day, easy to see where they land


Yeah. I'll just get in my boat, in all the calmness and shoot. :action-sm



Good thread, though. I have nothing to add that hasn't been mentioned though, aside from also agreeing that a 28 gauge spraying bb's up, is not going to fuck you up on the way down as bad as TFR said in the opening post. That's just not the way it works. Not even in the least. Someone likened it to getting a handful of gravel thrown on you, that's about accurate. It'd require gravel larger than said bb's however.

Any idea how heavy, in measurement those bb's were, anyone?
We'll get a fucking equation written out to prove it won't fuck you up at the same speed it left the barrel. Heh.

[TreeFortRichard]

I would just like to point out that my post intially had nothing to do with injury. My prob was with the assertion that the shotgun pellets had no remaining velocity from the initial firing upon their return to their origin. That's all...Now granted as usuall this is all over the place now, but I love it. I just wanted to point out that because the pellets got in the air from the gun all of their velocity is from the gun. Gravity is constant.

[ChrisC_EIT]

If a player throws a baseball straight up at 90mph it will fall back down and be going 90mph when it reaches the height he let it go.

No it won't.

I don't know if it was your example regarding shooting the same shot on the moon - but yes, disregarding any effects from the motion of the moon itself (it's spin or wobble) or it's shape (curvature), shot fired from a shotgun would arrive back on the moon at the same speed. The one problem that the earth has isn't apparent on the moon.

And I thought the point of the nitpicker post was to get all the stupid people to feel good about their grasp of science and the rest of us another chance to laugh today?

[Angry typng guy]

I think in Back to the Future 4 it is the resonant frequency of Mr Fox's palsy that interferes with the super string

[TreeFortRichard]

No it won't.

I don't know if it was your example regarding shooting the same shot on the moon - but yes, disregarding any effects from the motion of the moon itself (it's spin or wobble) or it's shape (curvature), shot fired from a shotgun would arrive back on the moon at the same speed. The one problem that the earth has isn't apparent on the moon.

And I thought the point of the nitpicker post was to get all the stupid people to feel good about their grasp of science and the rest of us another chance to laugh today?
Umm Yes it will. That is an example from the Physics text i am looking at right now. It will...it will...it will. 90mph up, 90mph down with the forces of gravity cancelling each other out BECAUSE GRAVITY IS CONSTANT

[Tax Kuntz]

In rare instances Hog Resonance may interfere with the frequency of a vibrating super string resulting in time travel

HUH?

[n8crwlr]

Actually the muzzle velocity would be higher...

http://www.chuckhawks.com/shotgun_recoil_table.htm
Damn, give me the 10 gauge........anyone stating 32fps is correct.......

[whiskeydick]

I assume you have never gone bird hunting, if what you said were true I would already be dead from all the falling pellets that have fallen on my head. May not be able to give you a physics lesson but I do know that professor Anthony is right on this one.

[Garm]

Now you went and made me make an example.
REGARDLESS of the speed at which the objects leave the cannons, once they reach apogee and start their decent, the most basic of gravitational laws takes over.
They are now just two objects of equal mass being dropped from the same height. The speed at which they left the cannons now has nothing to do with the speed that they will hit the ground even though the object leaving the cannon on the left would have been fired at a much higher velocity.


http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y28/cloudmax/gravity02.jpg

Hu?, why wouldnt the cannon ball fired from the taller hill go further up than the other one?

[Big Dick Mcgee]

Apogee big word for a fancy man.

[snail trails]

yeah dont ? the professor. he uses ferrell-o-graphs to prove his point.

[pinkertonfloyd]

Hu?, why wouldnt the cannon ball fired from the taller hill go further up than the other one?


Even if it did, they would still hit the ground at the same speed.

It's all Newton's fault... and the law!

[Three Testies]

Hu?, why wouldnt the cannon ball fired from the taller hill go further up than the other one?

Holy shit, 4 pages on this? Jesus H. C. Basic physics is this difficult eh? :icon_surp
And that wasnt WBLs point. read again.

[Tax Kuntz]

Physics sucked in high school and it hasn't gotten any better.

Drop an intern out the window and throw another one up and out the window. If they weigh approximately the same amount, they will both die at the same speed.

[jpc165]

http://electron9.phys.utk.edu/phys135d/modules/m3/Projectile%20motion.htm

[whiskeydick]

Maybe stalker Patty can do some tests and set us all straight

[Angry typng guy]

Mousetraps in the landing zone maybe?

[jpc165]

Hu?, why wouldnt the cannon ball fired from the taller hill go further up than the other one?

The cannon on the higher hill has less muzzle velocity so it reaches its 0 vertical velocity in less time.

My cock has low muzzle velocity, so my jizz starts to fall downward pretty damn quick.

[kingrat]

Wait...just for the sake of simplifying it for everyone, can we replace the words "cannon ball" with Scott Ferrall?

[TreeFortRichard]

Now you went and made me make an example.
REGARDLESS of the speed at which the objects leave the cannons, once they reach apogee and start their decent, the most basic of gravitational laws takes over.
They are now just two objects of equal mass being dropped from the same height. The speed at which they left the cannons now has nothing to do with the speed that they will hit the ground even though the object leaving the cannon on the left would have been fired at a much higher velocity.


http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y28/cloudmax/gravity02.jpg
Your post is very correct, and would be aprropriate if there were 2 groups of hunters, 2 on different hills overlooking a valley w/ 2 different types of guns....but your example is not the same as my original post. At the point the cannoball returns to the exact altitude of the cannon it was fired from it is going the same speed as it was when it left the cannon...The cannon on the left must have a higher muzzle velocity to elevate the cannon ball against gravity than the cannon on the right. The extra fall distance once the balls fall below their origin is all gravity. I was never talking about that...I want to go so far as to apply the ole 'apples and organges' here... My whole point in all of this, nothing else, was that the velocity of the pellets from the gun is all due to the gun. I promise this is the last time i write this velocity up = velocity down...gravity cancels out. That is all.

[whiskeydick]

would be like a retarded elmer fudd if she started messing with a shotgun

[bathroom sentry]

Now you went and made me make an example.
REGARDLESS of the speed at which the objects leave the cannons, once they reach apogee and start their decent, the most basic of gravitational laws takes over.
They are now just two objects of equal mass being dropped from the same height. The speed at which they left the cannons now has nothing to do with the speed that they will hit the ground even though the object leaving the cannon on the left would have been fired at a much higher velocity.


http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y28/cloudmax/gravity02.jpg
little tissue in the bra will fix that...damn chemo

[cosmic cow]

even a feather dropped from that height hits the ground at the same speed---without air resistance of course.

Wbl, Is there life after death? How can space go on forever?

[ChrisC_EIT]

Umm Yes it will. That is an example from the Physics text i am looking at right now. It will...it will...it will. 90mph up, 90mph down with the forces of gravity cancelling each other out BECAUSE GRAVITY IS CONSTANT

Your text is poorly written, as it is completely disregarding air resistance. What is the title and author and publisher if you don't mind my asking?

The baseball thrown vertically at 90 mph will not reach EARTH 1 at 90 mph when it returns. It meets air resistance on the way up so it never reaches the height at which it needs to fall to once again achieve it's initial velocity.

Interestingly, in the case of the baseball, it's terminal velocity is just a shade over 90mph so the air resistance on the way down doesn't really come into play.

[bathroom sentry]

what if it's a knuckleball?

/clearly not intelligent enough for this threat...i'm moving along now

[Save My Up's Dick]

The cannon on the higher hill has less muzzle velocity so it reaches its 0 vertical velocity in less time.

My cock has low muzzle velocity, so my jizz starts to fall downward pretty damn quick.

Damn, I wish I knew how to photo shop. Can someone photo shop two dicks on Wbl's pic?

BTW Wbl, you are 100% corrrrrect.

[zappafred]

Maybe stalker Patty can do some tests and set us all straight


Hopefully nobody lives above her.

[Sajix]

Another correction - Bird Shot generally has 7 to 8 pellets of birdshot and not hundreds as Ant mentioned.

Unless that was hyperbole, in which case I'll go flish my unit, yada yada yada

[BruceKellysJunk]

Ant is right. Whoever says differently is wrong and wrong.



and I dont care if you took physics in college, I majored in it (even if classical mechanics was my worst subject and I cant stand that shit) and I know the real truth.

Its all about the terminal velocity.

[jpc165]

Interestingly, in the case of the baseball, it's terminal velocity is just a shade over 90mph so the air resistance on the way down doesn't really come into play.

The air resistance still works against the ball when it starts to fall though. It starts accelerating from its maximum height reached at 9.8m/s^2, but air resistance slows down that acceleration as the ball picks up speed on its descent.

[Garm]

AHHH, I hope you're kidding. It's a weaker load to make a lower muzzle velocity.

WTF r u talking about? weaker load? the force on both c-balls is the same, so they should both travel the same distance, as long as there both at the same angle..im guessing 90 degrees... if the cannon on the hill is 200 feet higher then that ball should peak, or it's apogee should be 200 feet higher that the other ball launched from the lower hill.

[Three Testies]

Another correction - Bird Shot generally has 7 to 8 pellets of birdshot and not hundreds as Ant mentioned.

Unless that was hyperbole, in which case I'll go flish my unit, yada yada yada

WHAT? Do you hunt with friggin quarter inch diameter pellets? Check your facts before spewing shit. http://www.youthtrapshooter.com/shot-conversion.htm
I would hate to shoot a small game bird like a quail/partridge with only 8 pellets. Haha, there would be nothing left. Never laughed like this for a while.

[thegreatgazoo]

Now you went and made me make an example.
REGARDLESS of the speed at which the objects leave the cannons, once they reach apogee and start their decent, the most basic of gravitational laws takes over.
They are now just two objects of equal mass being dropped from the same height. The speed at which they left the cannons now has nothing to do with the speed that they will hit the ground even though the object leaving the cannon on the left would have been fired at a much higher velocity.


http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y28/cloudmax/gravity02.jpg


You have to admit, the man is amazing!!!:clap:

[Three Testies]

WTF r u talking about? weaker load? the force on both c-balls is the same, so they should both travel the same distance, as long as there both at the same angle..im guessing 90 degrees... if the cannon on the hill is 200 feet higher then that ball should peak, or it's apogee should be 200 feet higher that the other ball launched from the lower hill.

Wow, did you read the pics? The one higher up has less gun powder and the one on the lower hill has more gun powder. Make sense now?

[Garm]

Now you went and made me make an example.
REGARDLESS of the speed at which the objects leave the cannons, once they reach apogee and start their decent, the most basic of gravitational laws takes over.
They are now just two objects of equal mass being dropped from the same height. The speed at which they left the cannons now has nothing to do with the speed that they will hit the ground even though the object leaving the cannon on the left would have been fired at a much higher velocity.



http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y28/cloudmax/gravity02.jpg

Ant, all this diagram is saying is that the cannon on the big hill is not as powerfull as the cannon on the small hill, I thought that it was given that both cannons are identical.

[huskerbob]

This is the most hilarious shit I've ever read. I'm in the Twilight Zone...

[Three Testies]

My whole POINT was based on 2 different muzzle velocities!
The right cannon has a smaller powder load in it. It dribbles out of the barrel.
The left cannon has a strong load and fires out at a much greater velocity.
My point is, if they were set up to reach the same height, they would hit the ground at the same speed.
You know what? Forget it.

My thought exactly, I dont think some of these guys passed high school. Great loffs in this thread though.

[Garm]

k, I'm a jackass, but I was so happy for a minutte when I thought I was right...Grrrrrrr

[Angry typng guy]

Holy shit...

[Three Testies]

We are all cynical jackasses at times, but thats why its so fun here.

[patbattlefield]

You know what? Forget it.

best thing said in this whole thread!

[Trickie]

At the point the cannoball returns to the exact altitude of the cannon it was fired from it is going the same speed as it was when it left the cannon....



That statement is 100% FALSE Did you pass physics??

[TreeFortRichard]

Ok, I get your point but I can not accept your saying that if I fire a shotgun into the air and stand underneath it I will be injured as if it was fired at me from point blank range. I know I would not be hit by every piece of shot but even one hitting me at the speed it had coming out of the barrel would kill me if it hit my head. It just wouldn't happen.
I know that. I am not denying that. I don't think it would do more than dent you...All I was saying when I started this 'Thread that is just exploding' is that you said on the....Anthony said on the air that there is none of the original velocity of the gun left. All of the velocity of the falling shot is from the gun, but it is not all there anymore. The majority of it is lost due to wind resistance, but NONE of it is lost due to gravity. On it's way up gravity has a -9.8m/s^2 effect, and on it's way down gravity has a +9.8m/s^2 effect on the shot. These 2 cancel each other out. Then air has a - effect on both the up and down and continually slows the object, but all of the remaining velocity is from the gun(only a lot less) and not gravity.

[Three Testies]

I think this thread should be deleted or people could get more dumber.

[patbattlefield]

isn't this the same as that old myth that if you drop a penny off the empire state building it could kill a pedestrian? this is one for mythbusters i say! if they haven't done this yet that is.

[Trickie]

Once either objects reaches its peak and starts do descend it is NOT AT ALL affected by the velocity at which it was originally shot. All of the kinetic energy given to it by the gun has been expended and it is falling to earth due to gravity alone.

[TreeFortRichard]

isn't this the same as that old myth that if you drop a penny off the empire state building it could kill a pedestrian? this is one for mythbusters i say! if they haven't done this yet that is.
carefull that was already mentioned a few pages ago..don't want you getting fragged

[Angry typng guy]

They did - it dosen't

[patbattlefield]

carefull that was already mentioned a few pages ago..don't want you getting fragged
i guess i'm read the last page of the thread and ignore the 4 other pages guy:action-sm

[TreeFortRichard]

That statement is 100% FALSE Did you pass physics??
WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT??? Please tell me how the statement that an object propelled at an instantaneous speed away from a much larger mass(gravity source) and then returning to that large mass is not traveling at the exact speed it left at? Gravity is constant. The object travels up up up....peaks...then down down down...Please explaine to me how i am wrong and i will not post in this thread agian. I am not talking about wind resistance here..this is a LAW of PHYSICS (Newtons law of motion) for god's sake. Have you ever done any vector addition?

[Three Testies]

noooo, vectors, I still have nightmares.

[TreeFortRichard]

Once either objects reaches its peak and starts do descend it is NOT AT ALL affected by the velocity at which it was originally shot. All of the kinetic energy given to it by the gun has been expended and it is falling to earth due to gravity alone.
the object took a certain amount of force to get to its peak. This force is a + vertical force, with a -9.9m/s^2 force of gravity acting on it for the duration of its vertical travel. Then when it peaks and begins decending it has a +9.8m/s^2 force on it. That will act on it for a period of time = to the amount of time it takes to get back to it's origin. This is the same amount time it took it to get from the origin to the peak. Because you have the same force of gravity acting on it you end up with the same speed. Is there anyone here who understands this?THE ONLY FORCE ACTING ON THE RISING OBJECT IS GRAVITY, it doesn't have a rocket engine propelling it...I will find a web example for you

[TreeFortRichard]

http://www.physicsclassroom.com/Class/vectors/U3L2a.html

here...


WELLL....we're waiting..

[BruceKellysJunk]

see, here is the problem with this logic.

the pellets in this case are at rest before the gun is fired. In the split second that they start moving, their accelleration is almost infinate in comparison. Even though the pellets have moved only a fraction of a centimeter, their accelleration is an enormous amount. Even by the time they have left the barrell of the gun they have slowed down tremendously compared to the initial blast. when they return to earth, they will not be accellerating at the same speed as they were at first.

[BillyDubbs]

Tree fort, you know nothing. stop it, I am hoping that you are not this stupid, and just trying get attention.

There is wind resistence, and the shotgun only propels it up. the gravity pulls it down, the same as if it fell from that height.

[Trickie]

WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT??? Please tell me how the statement that an object propelled at an instantaneous speed away from a much larger mass(gravity source) and then returning to that large mass is not traveling at the exact speed it left at? Gravity is constant. The object travels up up up....peaks...then down down down...Please explaine to me how i am wrong and i will not post in this thread agian. I am not talking about wind resistance here..this is a LAW of PHYSICS (Newtons law of motion) for god's sake. Have you ever done any vector addition?


I will try to exmplain this as simply as I can. When the "object" is being shot upward it is being propelled by in this case gunpowder. If I fire my SKS straight up the air the bullet is leaving the muzzle at about 2300 fps. It is going that fast because of the explosion forcing it out that fast. As the bullet reaches its apex it has used up all of that energy given to it by the gunpwder.

The bullets return trip to earth is courtesy of gravity alone and its terminal velocity (a couple of hundred mph) will NEVER come anywhere close to what it was when it left the gun with the help of the gunpowder.

Let me know if I can elaborate further.

[BillyDubbs]

honestly though I heard the guy was 30 yards away. Anyone hear what angle the shot was fired at

[Trickie]

......THE ONLY FORCE ACTING ON THE RISING OBJECT IS GRAVITY.....

^ you


me> Are you now saying that gravity is propelling the object upward?

Dont try to intimidate us with your equations, it is not that complicated just common sense. If you are fucking with me congrats you got me if you are serious, god help you.



edit: you just answered my question with this "kThis force is a + vertical force, with a -9.9m/s^2 force of gravity acting on it for the d"

You are saying that the object in this phase has a negative force of gravity acting upon it.

[Three Testies]

30 yards away with over 100 pellets coming at you doing a little over 1000 feet per second.......yeah hes hurting.

[Deadbent]

A lot of back and forth, but still probably one of the better discussion threads I've seen in a while. It's not bad when we can dish out more than oneliners and cancer jokes. For true.

tfr. I re-read and now understand you were not trying to assert the "damage" if I may, from said firing.


Someone get me the weight of said bb's from the shells in question. We'll figure out exactly how fast these things will be travelling on the way down when they reach their exact point of origin, and cross reference that to what they were doing on the way out in the first place.


btw, trickle, you have decent logic. props.

[Multiple Miggs]

A flame war over physics.

Only on WB. :icon_wink

[Three Testies]

Someone get me the weight of said bb's from the shells in question. We'll figure out exactly how fast these things will be travelling on the way down when they reach their exact point of origin.

I posted a link to shell info on one of the earlier pages. Great thread indeed. Noone knows what the other is saying and everyone is right, (whos misinterpreting the site google lead them to?) el oh el. I think youd need the terminal velocity of the pellets to calculate that and although I have never been hit by one I dont think it would do that much damage. Chances are slim to non a pellet would hit you since the pattern of the pellets spreads out and would be like a firework explosion sorta but happening gradually as they fly upward. I've shot many shells in the woods straight up in the air and theres lots of noise from the pellets hitting the leaves but none came close to me.

[TreeFortRichard]

I will try to exmplain this as simply as I can. When the "object" is being shot upward it is being propelled by in this case gunpowder. If I fire my SKS straight up the air the bullet is leaving the muzzle at about 2300 fps. It is going that fast because of the explosion forcing it out that fast. As the bullet reaches its apex it has used up all of that energy given to it by the gunpwder.

The bullets return trip to earth is courtesy of gravity alone and its terminal velocity (a couple of hundred mph) will NEVER come anywhere close to what it was when it left the gun with the help of the gunpowder.

Let me know if I can elaborate further.
Although i find all of the stories about firing bullets in the air fascinating, I will tell you again, please read carefully. I am not, nor have i ever, been talking about wind resistance (Ie term velocity). If an object is thrown/shot/flung/catapulted away from a mass...and read carefully...is in a HUGE vacuum(No air, and no air resistance) and that mass has the same exact mass as the earth, so it's gravitational pull is 9.8m/s^2 (not an equation, a constant) the object will return to it's origin at the exact same speed it left it's origin. The ONLY!!!! Force acting upon this object is gravity. I know there is someone out there who has passed a physics course who understands this...If you don't understand that gravity is the only force acting upon this object please read the page link i had a few posts ago.

[Trickie]

BTW i've never taken a physics class nor have I googled anything.

I am a pilot and I regularly have some fun at the shooting range and I have common sense.

[Deadbent]

I posted a link to shell info on one of the earlier pages. Great thread indeed. Noone knows what the other is saying and everyone is right, (whos misinterpreting the site google lead them to?) el oh el. I think youd need the terminal velocity of the pellets to calculate that and although I have never been hit by one I dont think it would do that much damage. Chances are slim to non a pellet would hit you since the pattern of the pellets spreads out and would be like a firework explosion sorta but happening gradually as they fly upward. I've shot many shells in the woods straight up in the air and theres lots of noise from the pellets hitting the leaves but none came close to me.


I'd go scour the thread for it, but... Arrrgh.
presuming it's the same slug cheney shot, the rain from those pellets, would be like.. Oh.. I dunno. Dropping 280 oldschool lead bb's on you from 500 feet up. Probably sting if they hit the skull, but jack shit else. they're still weak
bb's.




I almost shit seeing that fucking picture Wbl kindly blessed the thread with, too. Wtf?
I must say, the best way to teach savages is indeed by force and visual examples.




Have a physics filled evening, you bastards.
Catch yas tomorrow.

[TreeFortRichard]

BTW i've never taken a physics class nor have I googled anything.

I am a pilot and I regularly have some fun at the shooting range and I have common sense.
I am being honest when i tell you I know you have not take a physics course b/c what you are saying is like someone telling you your plane is flying faster into the wind because the prop is going faster. where as a pilot you know that your speed is relative to the ground and you will actually be going slower into the wind...Please just agree...please...or my head will xplode! :action-sm

[jpc165]

That link is still talking about ideal projectile motion without air resistance, which acts in the opposite direction of the movement upward and then downward.

Physics starts out with the ideal concepts(easy to grasp) and then adds non-ideal/real world applications(slightly harder to understand) later in the lessons.

See skydiving example which shows how the Force of air resistance affects you as you fall.

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/JianHuang.shtml

[TreeFortRichard]

That link is still talking about ideal projectile motion without air resistance, which acts in the opposite direction of the movement upward and then downward.

Physics starts out with the ideal concepts(easy to grasp) and then adds non-ideal/real world applications(slightly harder to understand) later in the lessons.
This is WACKBAG my friend...I think half of us are just monkeys hitting the right keys every once in a while...:icon_bigg

[Beeman99]

well, WBL is going to have good foder for the show tomorrow. I can hear it now "Some of the WB'rs are dumber than dogshit"

[Trickie]

I will concede that in a vaccuum and with the bullet then having unlimited downward acceleration it is then possible for the bullet to pass the gun at the same speed it was fired. However, anthony's diagram didn't assume that we were in a vaccuum. When you start taking things like air out of the hypothetical situation it loses its relevance to the topic.

[Frankie_Ballz]

TFR is right... ignoring all other factors, a projectile fired up will expend all of its kinetic energy to reach its peak, after that it will be accellerated downward at 32 fps/s (gravity on earth) landing with the exact same speed that it left with. If air resistance is factored in than the projectile will fall at terminal velicity, if it reached a height sufficient for it to acclerate to terminal velocity. and i did physics in college.

[Three Testies]

If you don't understand that gravity is the only force acting upon this object please read the page link i had a few posts ago.

:clap: :clap: Thats what I meant about noone knows what the other is saying. You are right and so is he, he just misinterpreted what you said.

[TreeFortRichard]

I certainly hope he doesn't attack my origial thread starting post, it is correct....and my ONLY point was that the pellet motion was entirely due to the original shot...and gravity just goes along for the ride...

[Trickie]

TFR I apologize I did not understand you were talking about the object being in a vaccuum.


Good analogy BTW

[TreeFortRichard]

This thread now needs the mario brother's music playing in the background....annnnndddd

PROGRAM COMPLETE :)

[BillyDubbs]

you were wrong the whole time and are back pedaling

[Garm]

This thread now needs the mario brother's music playing in the background....annnnndddd

PROGRAM COMPLETE :)

Lets play what did we learn in this thread as the music plays.

[kvuo]

no atmosphere changes everything. There are several people here, Ant included, that have explained it perfectly. There are a few people who have no grasp of basic newtonian physics or the way the world works, and it's a shame. BTW, my shotgun experiment was done several years ago, so I already knew the shit before today.

I'm just glad the show didn't take calls from people explaining how spinning causes gravity :) :) :) damned jimmy tried to start it again.



if cheney was shooting upland birds, I think they still use lead for them yea? just waterfowl uses steel/bismuth/tungsten etc.


i shall weigh and measure a #8 lead shot pellet now. brb

[Garm]

Wait spinning does cause gravity... dont you remember the gravitron at your local amusement park.... Im just kidding:action-sm

[jpc165]

gotta love jimmy physics 101

http://www.onfocus.com/cam/2004/gravitron.jpg

[pissonhoohoo]

What about anodes and cathodes and Lil Jimmy's bottle o piss? How does that affect the velocity of it all in this strange place?

[kvuo]

There. I weighed and measured shotgun pellets out of a 1 ounce 12 gauge #8 lead shot general purpose sport load I just dissected... I weigh 6 random ones with a powder scale with a resolution of 0.1 grains, each pellet = approx. 10.833 grains.

Diameter I measured 10 random pellets with dial calipers, resolution 0.001 inch, I average to 0.0856 inches.

Real cool doods can do the math now and figure out how fast one can get going from gravity alone!

(I would just presume pure lead, but i'm pretty sure it is an alloy of lead and something else)


As a curiosity, a one ounce 2-3/4 12 gauge load of #8 shot has 410 pellets.

[Trickie]

You wanna see a physics thread that made my head spin?

These fellas were trying to determine what kind of impact you would have with a plane and a car colliding, both traveling at 65mph in opposite directions.


http://forums.aopa.org/showthread.php?t=7835&page=3&highlight=physics

Fascinating stuff, I will be sure and take a class if i go back to school.

[whiskeydick]

damn still on the same subject? It is as simple as professor Anthony is right, everyone else is a tool.

[TreeFortRichard]

You wanna see a physics thread that made my head spin?

These fellas were trying to determine what kind of impact you would have with a plane and a car colliding, both traveling at 65mph in opposite directions.


http://forums.aopa.org/showthread.php?t=7835&page=3&highlight=physics

Fascinating stuff, I will be sure and take a class if i go back to school.
RVIS from Spies Like Us took care of this i thought? (Radical Vertical Impact Simulator)

[whiskeydick]

if two faggots fall face first out of a building at 70 mph does anyone really care?

[whiskeydick]

excuse me sir I think you dropped something

[Mooseman]

You wanna see a physics thread that made my head spin?

No! We all ready decided that its not about the spinning.

[Smokezilla]

I like fudge. . . :icon_conf

RAMONE. . . this thread sucks Einstein's cock!!!:icon_wink

[whiskeydick]

excuse me sure who packed this fudge???

[Don West]

There. I weighed and measured shotgun pellets out of a 1 ounce 12 gauge #8 lead shot general purpose sport load I just dissected... I weigh 6 random ones with a powder scale with a resolution of 0.1 grains, each pellet = approx. 10.833 grains.

Diameter I measured 10 random pellets with dial calipers, resolution 0.001 inch, I average to 0.0856 inches.

Real cool doods can do the math now and figure out how fast one can get going from gravity alone!

(I would just presume pure lead, but i'm pretty sure it is an alloy of lead and something else)


As a curiosity, a one ounce 2-3/4 12 gauge load of #8 shot has 410 pellets.
The force dues to air restistance is given by F = 1/2 CdAv^2 where C is the drag coefficient, d is the air density, A is the cross sectional area of the object and v is the velocity. At terminal velocity the force due to gravity is equal to the drag force so you set them equal (the simplified equation for the force due to gravity is F = mg).
1/2 CdAv^2 = mg
Solving this for v gives
v = (2mg / CdA)^1/2

The only problem is getting the coefficient of drag which is pretty much different for every object and is usually found experimentally


And whoever said something about something having gone faster than the speed of light earlier is wrong. It hasn't happened nor will it ever happen. You can get infinitely close to the speed of light (they've gotten subatomic particles to go over 99.99% of the speed of light) but never reach it. Impossibly long distances may be traversed eventually but it will not be due to going faster than the speed of light, it will be due to taking advantage of the curvature of spacetime.

[whiskeydick]

I bring nothing to the table

[Suicidebree]

I am a nuclear physics major. Just thought I'd add that. I like to throw it around, it sounds fancier than it really is. I have nothing to say about this argument. Good day sirs!

[WoodenPlank]

Are you insane?
If you drop a cannon ball off a building will it hit the ground at a slower speed than a cannon ball fired from a cannon up to the hight of the building, arching, and returning to the ground?

Your theory would have the fired cannon ball hitting the ground with at the same velocity it left the cannon at! RE-fucking-diculous.

Its going to depend on the height youre dropping it from. However, if you wanna get silly with this, the same amount of force applied to the fired cannonball to get it to the height of the building was ALSO applied to the dropped cannonball....by hauling it the roof of said building to start with. Again, on assumption, if the fired cannonball came to a dead stop at, say, 100m above the ground, and began its fall, it would hit the ground with the exact same force as a cannonball DROPPED from the same height.

So, yes, they hit the ground at the same velocity, regardless of how damn fast the fired one was going when it left the cannon.
I guess its key to remember that since the ball comes to a DEAD STOP at the apex (vertically anyway) then its speed on impact is totally determined by the height of said apex.

Basically, WBL is right. Took me all that fucking typing just to agree with him. I stink.

Ok, so Im a bigger nerd than I first let on. Helps to be on a keyboard at a PC instead of a pocket PC in a taco bell eating.

[whiskeydick]

fucking shit sounds like Ferrell all I can understand is blah blah blah cannon ball blah blah terminal velocity

[WoodenPlank]

fucking shit sounds like Ferrell all I can understand is blah blah blah cannon ball blah blah terminal velocity
Then dont worry about it. *shrug*

[CM Mark]

32 feet per second / per second is actually the acceleration of a falling body due to gravity, the only thing that influences terminal velocity is the actual shape of the object.
or the way I learned it in high school AP Physics, 9.8 Meters per second per second is acceleration due to gravity.

I only read page 1, so if this was posted again later, meh, I suck

[Baby Evil]

Somewhere on SFN there is an argument between clinical phychiatrics about whether or not Joey Boots needs to be put on meds, a padded room, chemically castrated, or all of the above.

[MrBogey]

I failed physics twice at LSU and got a D the third time. Now that my credentials are out there... I concur with Anthony on this matter.

Also spinnign has nothign to do with gravity. Gravitational pull is straight up mass of the two objects and their radius apart.

[Premarital Sex]

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y28/cloudmax/gravity02.jpg
Anyone else in the mood to play 'Gorilla' on the ol' Qbasic?

[Don West]

Somewhere on SFN there is an argument between clinical phychiatrics about whether or not Joey Boots needs to be put on meds, a padded room, chemically castrated, or all of the above.
If ferrall is running at a velocity of of 3 m/s at time t=0 in the positive x direction and howard stern's boner makes an angle of 53 degrees with respect to the horizontal at displacement x=20 meters and his pcmuscle accelerates his sperm of mass = 0.010 kg with a force of 5.1 Newtons for 0.4 seconds, what is the velocity of Howards load when it strikes the back of ferrall's throat in ferrall's reference frame? Neglect air resistance and friction between hoo hoo's semen and urethra.

[CM Mark]

Anyone else in the mood to play 'Gorilla' on the ol' Qbasic?
Greatest game ever. I really wish I could find an updated version of that to play it again.

[CM Mark]

If ferrall is running at a velocity of of 3 m/s at time t=0 in the positive x direction and howard stern's boner makes an angle of 53 degrees with respect to the horizontal at displacement x=20 meters and his pcmuscle accelerates his sperm of mass = 0.010 kg with a force of 5.1 Newtons for 0.4 seconds, what is the velocity of Howards load when it strikes the back of ferrall's throat in ferrall's reference frame? Neglect air resistance and friction between hoo hoo's semen and urethra.
C/UxM+S/H=OT2

[girthymac]

Ok, heres the real explanation. The only way were are gonna find out is, go to Jimmy's house on a Sunday night, when the visqueen is rolled out. Then we clock how long it takes a log to go from a hookers ass, to lil' jimmy's chest! Then it will be final. THATS THE ONLY WAY!

[OpieNuggets]

About Ant's example...
http://www.dregs.net/ona/images/gravity03.jpg

Yes, the objects hit the "ground" at the same speed, but they also travel at the same speed at points A and B.

TreeFortRichard would have you believe that at point A they travel at the initial velocity of the low velocity cannon, and at point B they are up to the initial velocity of the high velocity cannon.

That being said, ever been caught in a hailstorm? Large hailstones may sting a bit, but they certainly don't pierce your body the way a gunshot would.

[Baby Evil]

If ferrall is running at a velocity of of 3 m/s at time t=0 in the positive x direction and howard stern's boner makes an angle of 53 degrees with respect to the horizontal at displacement x=20 meters and his pcmuscle accelerates his sperm of mass = 0.010 kg with a force of 5.1 Newtons for 0.4 seconds, what is the velocity of Howards load when it strikes the back of ferrall's throat in ferrall's reference frame? Neglect air resistance and friction between hoo hoo's semen and urethra.

The electrical charge would be 1.21 jizzumwatts.


CAR CRASH

[supertool]

One of the undeniable axioms in physics with regard to terminal velocity is that the more dense and compact an object is the greater it's speed, of course the drag coefficient has to be considered as well. However, an even less considered byproduct is the Wile E. Coyote factor wich would allow you to say, stand on the previously discussed cannonball as it fell to the earth and at the last moment before impact- step off to the side without sustaining injury.

[WoodenPlank]

We all realize that Professor Anthony was right now. At least I hope everyone does. If not, well, thats their fucking problem.

Tool:
That doesnt work, and you know it. If youre standing on said cannonball, you and the cannonball are falling at the same rate, and stepping off of it at the last second is STILL going to dump your sorry, cannonball-riding ass onto the ground hard enough to break your knees. Or worse. I just hope that was a lame attempt at humor.

[Premarital Sex]

Okay, your original post:
Anthony stated that the shotgun pellets slow as they arrive back to earth, after being shot in the air. Well, all objects, when sent away from earth at a velocity return via gravity to the same point with the same velocity, because gravity is constant.
So you're saying the pellet's speed of motion (velocity) is the same falling from the sky as it is being shot from the barrel?

Gun powder creates the ascent, gravity creates the decent. Gun powder is stronger than gravity, if it wasn't the fuckin things wouldn't go up in the first place. Therefore, they move faster after being propelled by gunpowder than if just gravity pulled it down.

[supertool]

We all realize that Professor Anthony was right now. At least I hope everyone does. If not, well, thats their fucking problem.

Tool:
That doesnt work, and you know it. If youre standing on said cannonball, you and the cannonball are falling at the same rate, and stepping off of it at the last second is STILL going to dump your sorry, cannonball-riding ass onto the ground hard enough to break your knees. Or worse. I just hope that was a lame attempt at humor.


Dude, are you fucking kidding me?

[whiskeydick]

snap on or craftsman?

[timmetro69]

Its going to depend on the height youre dropping it from. However, if you wanna get silly with this, the same amount of force applied to the fired cannonball to get it to the height of the building was ALSO applied to the dropped cannonball....by hauling it the roof of said building to start with. Again, on assumption, if the fired cannonball came to a dead stop at, say, 100m above the ground, and began its fall, it would hit the ground with the exact same force as a cannonball DROPPED from the same height.

So, yes, they hit the ground at the same velocity, regardless of how damn fast the fired one was going when it left the cannon.
I guess its key to remember that since the ball comes to a DEAD STOP at the apex (vertically anyway) then its speed on impact is totally determined by the height of said apex.

Basically, WBL is right. Took me all that fucking typing just to agree with him. I stink.

Ok, so Im a bigger nerd than I first let on. Helps to be on a keyboard at a PC instead of a pocket PC in a taco bell eating.

Bravo WoodenPlank! Best damn explanation in the whole thread. TFR, you're wrong - sorry.

If two identical things "fall" from the same height - regardless of how they got there - their potential energy prior to the fall is the same.

One may have gotten there by being shot out of a cannon and ultimately losing upward velocity due to gravity until it's motionless for a split second at a particular height.

The other could be carried to the exact same height up a ladder.

If both "things" have the same physical characteristics (ie - identical cannon balls), then they will fall at the same rate - REGARDLESS OF HOW THEY GOT TO THE POINT WHERE THEY STARTED DESCENDING!

The initial velocity out of the gun, cannon, whatever has nothing to do with it.

[WoodenPlank]

Dude, are you fucking kidding me?

Nope. Try it some time in your own front yard. Find a board or something to stand on, (a skateboard works wonderfully), then step off a small ledge, like a porch or a bench. Then try stepping off it at the last second. No matter what, youre gonna feel the pressure just like you stepped off with nothing under you. Youre both falling at the samn damn rate, no matter what.

[supertool]

Bravo WoodenPlank! Best damn explanation in the whole thread. TFR, you're wrong - sorry.

If two identical things "fall" from the same height - regardless of how they got there - their potential energy prior to the fall is the same.

One may have gotten there by being shot out of a cannon and ultimately losing upward velocity due to gravity until it's motionless for a split second at a particular height.

The other could be carried to the exact same height up a ladder.

If both "things" have the same physical characteristics (ie - identical cannon balls), then they will fall at the same rate - REGARDLESS OF HOW THEY GOT TO THE POINT WHERE THEY STARTED DESCENDING!

The initial velocity out of the gun, cannon, whatever has nothing to do with it.

Yeah, it took eight pages to figure out one of the most basic, elemental rules of physics. Bravo.

[Hudson]

My question is when all the mexicans in the Three Amigos shot their guns in the air...why did they suddenly look at each other and run? Just asking :)

[whiskeydick]

good point, maybe they read this thread

[supertool]

Nope. Try it some time in your own front yard. Find a board or something to stand on, (a skateboard works wonderfully), then step off a small ledge, like a porch or a bench. Then try stepping off it at the last second. No matter what, youre gonna feel the pressure just like you stepped off with nothing under you. Youre both falling at the samn damn rate, no matter what.


Dude, google "Road runner cartoon" if you want an example of my of my research. I see that you were born the year before I graduated high school and with that in mind I would make the example more "current" for you but I don't think that there were any episodes where Barney jumped off a cliff.

[supertool]

My question is when all the mexicans in the Three Amigos shot their guns in the air...why did they suddenly look at each other and run? Just asking :)


Pretty fucking funny. You better be careful though, some one may actually try to give you a scientific explanation.

[WoodenPlank]

Dude, google "Road runner cartoon" if you want an example of my of my research. I see that you were born the year before I graduated high school and with that in mind I would make the example more "current" for you but I don't think that there were any episodes where Barney jumped off a cliff.
How about next time you throw some fucking sarcasm tags in there? Im used to dealing with idiots that spout random things on a daily basis, and you cant read tone of voice in typed text...

[Hudson]

Listen all I know is that my dad once told me never to shoot a gun straight up in the air because the bullet will fall at the almost the same speed it left the Barrel.
That said, who wants a Fresca?

[supertool]

How about next time you throw some fucking sarcasm tags in there? Im used to dealing with idiots that spout random things on a daily basis, and you cant read tone of voice in typed text...

The Wile E. Coyote factor wasn't a tip off? Besides I don't believe in the sarcasm smileys. It seems a little redundant since this is wackbag and we, contrary to some opinions, are not trying to save the world. Either way dude, I'm just having fun with you, no harm meant. I actually thougjht that YOU were fucking with me, which would have been funny.

[WoodenPlank]

The Wile E. Coyote factor wasn't a tip off? Besides I don't believe in the sarcasm smileys. It seems a little redundant since this is wackbag and we, contrary to some opinions, are not trying to save the world. Either way dude, I'm just having fun with you, no harm meant. I actually thougjht that YOU were fucking with me, which would have been funny.
Dude, after the long fucking day Ive had, Im willing to believe any BS thrown my was is thrown out as something that the person believes is fact. Sorry for the yelling...
Yeah, fucking with you back would have been damn hilarious, and had I been in a better mood I might have done it on purpose instead of accidentally. Eh, it works. Whatever.

[Don West]

How about next time you throw some fucking sarcasm tags in there? Im used to dealing with idiots that spout random things on a daily basis, and you cant read tone of voice in typed text...
Is it true that if you paint a tunnel on the side of a mountain that a roadrunner may be able to enter it without trouble but if a coyote tried the same thing he would just slam into it?

[supertool]

Listen all I know is that my dad once told me never to shoot a gun straight up in the air because the bullet will fall at the almost the same speed it left the Barrel.
That said, who wants a Fresca?


You know, you always see those news clips of Muslims celebrating, protesting, whatever the occassion, firing their AK47's into the sky. I always wonder, "where the fuck are all those bullets landing?"

[supertool]

Is it true that if you paint a tunnel on the side of a mountain that a roadrunner may be able to enter it without trouble but if a coyote tried the same thing he would just slam into it?


Only when the paint is provided by the Acme paint co.

[WoodenPlank]

Is it true that if you paint a tunnel on the side of a mountain that a roadrunner may be able to enter it without trouble but if a coyote tried the same thing he would just slam into it?
See, now THAT is fucking obvious. Eh, Im just a dense ol douche tonight...


As for the muslims, Ive always wondered the same thing. Yet you always hear of at least one person dying from people firing guns into the air at Mardi Gras every year. Sounds like a convenient excuse to blast the guy banging your wife.

[Three Testies]

So in v = 1/2 gt^2 a higher distance gives greater t.
yaaaaaaaaay. I peed in your pool. yaaaaaaaay

[whiskeydick]

I miss those old cartoons, lot of knowledge we are missing out on...

[lil'beaver]

I cannot believe this. your physics only goes so far then you have to use common sense to see if what you are trying to say makes any sense.

I shoot bats flying around in the sky at dusk ever once in a while. a few seconds after i shoot i can sometimes here the pellets hitting the top of my house, then trickling down to the gutter. if what you are saying was true there would be small pin holes in my roof and the pellets would be in my living room.

Use a little common sense.

[whiskeydick]

I'll always aggree with a lil beaver...

[Three Testies]

Why agree when its more fun to debate?

[supertool]

I cannot believe this. your physics only goes so far then you have to use common sense to see if what you are trying to say makes any sense.

I shoot bats flying around in the sky at dusk ever once in a while. a few seconds after i shoot i can sometimes here the pellets hitting the top of my house, then trickling down to the gutter. if what you are saying was true there would be small pin holes in my roof and the pellets would be in my living room.

Use a little common sense.


You know , to be a little more current, I recently saw an episode of the Fairly Odd parents where Timmy wishes for this great big gun and......some one else pick this up, I'm tired. Later.

[patbattlefield]

BORING!!!!

[WoodenPlank]

You know , to be a little more current, I recently saw an episode of the Fairly Odd parents where Timmy wishes for this great big gun and......
It was delivered the next morning in a giant box labeled ACME, brought by a funny-looking Coyote that seemed to be glad to be rid of it. Timmy didnt know what to expect from his new......
(Yes, now some other sod can continue this garbage)

[OpieNuggets]

IF gravity were the only factor, TFR's (theoretical) argument that an object fired into the air reaches it's initial velocity upon return is absolutely correct. But here in the real world, such factors as air resistance and terminal velocity actually exist.

And I'm not sure the Wile E. Coyote theory is accurate either, as I rarely see the Coyote escape injury. (But I have seen him stand in mid air, at least until he looked down and realized there was nothing supporting him).

[patbattlefield]

please god don't let this be a subject on the show again. i will fucking blow my brains out!

[daytona]

I am going to have to disagree with the whole thread, and please feel free to flame away at me if i am wrong because i didnt get a chance to catch todays show, but this thread is assuming that the bullet was shot at a 90 degree angle, meaning straight into the air. i believe that if it is 85-95 degrees, the bullet will go up, stop, and come back down at terminal velocity (given it has time to reach it, or maybe it is automatically there, i dont know/care). however, if it is fired at any other angle, the bullet will not actually stop in mid-air and come down, it will arch, and by doing so, it will not lose all of the force from the gun firing it

[patbattlefield]

i guess they did use the right term for how the guy was shot!peppering - Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48 :

Pepper \Pep"per\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. Peppered; p. pr. & vb.
n. Peppering.]
1. To sprinkle or season with pepper.
[1913 Webster]

2. Figuratively: To shower shot or other missiles, or blows,
upon; to pelt; to fill with shot, or cover with bruises or
wounds; as, to pepper him with buckshot. "I have peppered
two of them." "I am peppered, I warrant, for this world."
--Shak.
[1913 Webster]

Peppering \Pep"per*ing\, a.
Hot; pungent; peppery. --Swift.
[1913 Webster]
and from dictionary.com
tr.v. pep·pered, pep·per·ing, pep·pers

1. To season or sprinkle with pepper.
2. To sprinkle liberally; dot.
3. To shower with or as if with small missiles. See Synonyms at barrage2.
4. To make (a speech, for example) lively and vivid with wit or invective.

and just to be thorough here is the definition of missile
mis·sile Audio pronunciation of "missile" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (msl, -l)
n.

1. An object or weapon that is fired, thrown, dropped, or otherwise projected at a target; a projectile.
2. A guided missile.
3. A ballistic missile.

[Hudson]

So....Which weighs more...a pound of gold or a pound of Bricks??

[patbattlefield]

So....Which weighs more...a pound of gold or a pound of Bricks??
i think a shitbrick weighs the most in this argument

[Zerohour]

well apparantly not all of us paid any attention in school.

A projectile is in 2 vectors, and the y vector (height) stops when deceleration due to gravity = velocity (differential equations). Then it returns to earth with an acceleration of 9.81ft/sec*sec. UNTIL it reaches terminal velocity which DOES NOT equal exit velocity of the gun.

Stupid people. :fight6: Keep claiming you know physics...:icon_roll :icon_roll


Oh yeah, SPINNING OF THE PLANET HAS NO EFFECT ON GRAVITY fuckheads. Its all mass atTraction. The equation to determine gravity is M1M2/D. Mass of object 1 times mass of object 2 divided by distance.

DUMBASSES.

[ChrisC_EIT]

This is WACKBAG my friend...I think half of us are just monkeys hitting the right keys every once in a while...:icon_bigg

There are *some* of us who are engineers who apply years of physics to design the fun things you use on a daily basis. There are also *some* of us who have hunted with birdshot and know that birdshot falling from the sky with the full force of gravity to propel it doesn't have the kinetic energy to break skin or do anything more than greatly annoy.

[TreeFortRichard]

I was going to let this die, but you bumped it :) All i will say is that if you read my first post i was simply trying to explain that the falling pellets are falling at a rate determined by the force at which they were elevated by the shot, and I was not including wind resistance because that is a - force. The Velocity of the falling pellets was determined by the shotgun force they were fired with, and not gravity. I know that gravity is pulling them down, but what people forget is that it was always pulling down at the same rate and that rate is - on the way up (slowing it) and + on the way down (Speeding it back up) at the same rate.
...Gravity pulls on things. If you shoot away from the earth gravity immediately begins slowing the pelllets with it's pull. When those pellets reach their peak they begin falling back towards earth and gravity then increases their velocity equivalent to the exact amount it decreased their speed on the way up....
ChrisC if you read the first post you will get what i am saying.(please!!!)..I can't believe this thing made it to 9 friggin pages....

[BrianFromIowa]

Ok, terrific!

[Three Testies]

well apparantly not all of us paid any attention in school.

A projectile is in 2 vectors, and the y vector (height) stops when deceleration due to gravity = velocity (differential equations). Then it returns to earth with an acceleration of 9.81ft/sec*sec. UNTIL it reaches terminal velocity which DOES NOT equal exit velocity of the gun.

Stupid people. :fight6: Keep claiming you know physics...:icon_roll :icon_roll


Oh yeah, SPINNING OF THE PLANET HAS NO EFFECT ON GRAVITY fuckheads. Its all mass atTraction. The equation to determine gravity is M1M2/D. Mass of object 1 times mass of object 2 divided by distance.

DUMBASSES.

Well, no shit. I see someone just read page 9.

[Three Testies]

Someone close this stupid thread. Apparently people got WAAAAAAAAy of the point on this.

[TreeFortRichard]

I think we need to slow this thread down by about 20% because it looks like the epitome of a drunk thread

[Three Testies]

Its been beaten into the ground worse than Ferrall.

[ChrisC_EIT]

ChrisC if you read the first post you will get what i am saying.(please!!!)..I can't believe this thing made it to 9 friggin pages....

I have read everything you've written. Much to my dismay, I might add.

When those pellets reach their peak they begin falling back towards earth and gravity then increases their velocity equivalent to the exact amount it decreased their speed on the way up....

You aren't correct. You are very wrong. You are also confusing two things in further posts - wind resistance and air resistance. *Wind* can theoretically "help" in that if air is moving in the direction of travel, then it applies a net positive force. Yes, wind can be vertical. The presence of *air*, however, is ALWAYS a detriment to motion.

An object propelled away from earth, no matter what the propellant is, no matter what the initial velocity is, will not reach earth (or as we would prefer, the initial elevation) with the same velocity except for one case - a vacuum. Where there is air resistance (not wind - AIR), an object will never reach the height that is required for that item to fall to earth with the same velocity as it was propelled.

This is completely ignoring the issue of "terminal velocity." Terminal Velocity doesn't even need to be part of this issue. However, the fact that a shotgun would be fired into the air, propelling objects FAR FAR FAR beyond their terminal velocity should really tell you something about your hypothesis and the point that Mr. Cumia was making during the show in regards to the notion of the term "peppering" and how it's being used to make it sound like VP Cheney didn't *shoot* Harry Whittington.

Frankly, your science stinks sir. Your reference to a textbook example was oversimplified because the writers wanted you to crawl before you ran. It's far easier to work on and understand F = ma without worrying about the problems of friction. You've made about 37 references to gravity being constant. Yes it is. So is the presence of air here on earth. I sincerely hope you've noticed that air is all around us. There is also no reason to discuss topics like vectors, since we're only concerned with the vertical component anyway.

I suppose I shouldn't have bumped the thread this morning. I guess I just feel it necessary to protect my own sometimes. I honestly smell a Mythbusters on this although frankly, it's probably a little dangerous in that it would get kids to start shooting each other, I'm sure.

[Three Testies]

lol, hurry and close this, its like a bad rerun on TV. Read all 9 pages before you post repetetive info.

[patbattlefield]

if you really care about this, kill yourself.

[fear]

ummm..........what?

[TreeFortRichard]

if you really care about this, kill yourself.
RIP...I believe you shot yourself in the head at 7:15am today when that call brought up this debacle :)

please god don't let this be a subject on the show again. i will fucking blow my brains out!

SEACREST OUT

[patbattlefield]

RIP...I believe you shot yourself in the head at 7:15am today when that call brought up this debacle :)

when anthony started talking about gravity i saw it coming and just put the barrel in my mouth:icon_mrgr

[WOWmagnet]

WARNING: Post whores detected.

32 feet per second, I tell you!

[Three Testies]

WARNING: Post whores detected.

32 feet per second, I tell you!

NO, ITS 9.8 m/s^2 DUMMY. :icon_lol: :icon_lol: :icon_lol:

[BillyDubbs]

Please Sticky this thread

[Schmed]

I called this morning at 7:16 about the "Title Search" with Anthony's home buying adventure, and made the mistake of correcting Anthony and trying to explain "Cetripetal" force (To support Norton that the rotation of the earth in fact does have something to do with us not floating away).

http://www.physicsclassroom.com/Class/circles/U6L1c.html

[HumpX]

Cheney was using a 28ga with birdshot, not 12 or 20.


a fucking womans gun....jesus. Might as well go for the .410 and wear camo colored high heels.

[Zerohour]

I called this morning at 7:16 about the "Title Search" with Anthony's home buying adventure, and made the mistake of correcting Anthony and trying to explain "Cetripetal" force (To support Norton that the rotation of the earth in fact does have something to do with us not floating away).

http://www.physicsclassroom.com/Class/circles/U6L1c.html


Wrong. Re-read your link.

The rotation of the earth about its axis has NOTHING to do with gravity. :icon_roll

http://www.physicsclassroom.com/Class/circles/U6L3c.html