Why did you take the initial upward velocity as 100*3^1/2?
The projectile is fired at an angle of π/3 upwards and the horizontal velocity is 100m/s, so the vertical velocity is 100tan(π/3), which is 100√3.
Hello, I don’t understand why the velocity of the car doesn’t change, since the projectile had a certain speed and becomes stationary, this would mean that if the initial momentum P was 10200 (projectile) + 200100 (car)=202000 and that doesn’t change for sure, the final velocity of the car should be 202000/210. Even if we consider that the initial velocity of the projectile in x was 200*cos alfa, it still had some velocity, which it transfers to the railcar.
Hi, I thought that energy was scalar so you can’t split the kinetic energy into components. Could you explain why you did so above?
Yes energy is a scalar, but velocity is a vector and you can split kinetic energy up into the two kinetic energies resulting from the two orthogonal components of the velocity. You can see that this is always works — it’s an instance of Pythagoras’s theorem.
Why have you calculated the kinetic energy in respect of the vertical velocity when you worked out the max altitude through the kinetic energy? I don’t understand that point
About the velocity of the car does not change when projectile lands, could I relate with with relative speed?
HI Clary. Do you mean that you could consider the relative horizontal velocity of the projectile and the car, and point out that it is zero, and therefore the velocity of the car won’t change? If so, then yes I think that would be a good answer.
Thanks, that’s what I meant.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.