0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
quote:You assume that two objects, where the gaps between the lowest point of the objects and the Earth is identical, will take the same time to drop to the Earth. This is demonstrably an erroneous experiment.
quote:The Galileo's experiment was done on eather the first or secund Moon landing with a 3# hammer and An egle father. and they broth landed at the same time.
quote:Originally posted by DoctorBeaverquote:You assume that two objects, where the gaps between the lowest point of the objects and the Earth is identical, will take the same time to drop to the Earth. This is demonstrably an erroneous experiment.That's exactly the opposite of what I said. My thought was that the object with more mass at the bottom would accelerate faster and hence hit the ground 1st.quote:The Galileo's experiment was done on eather the first or secund Moon landing with a 3# hammer and An egle father. and they broth landed at the same time.Did they? I don't remember any instruments capable of measuring in nanoseconds being used; and that's what the difference would have been.Brand new forum...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please
REGISTER or LOGINMore than just science
quote:Originally posted by DoctorBeaverThat's exactly the opposite of what I said. My thought was that the object with more mass at the bottom would accelerate faster and hence hit the ground 1st.
quote:Originally posted by DoctorBeaverGeorge - I think DrB has almost got what I mean. I'm not talking about the centre of gravity, although that obviously comes into it.I wasn't considering the object stretching - but I suppose that would be a by-product. My point was that if the bottom of the sphere & the bottom of the cone were the same distance from the planet, the part of the cone that was higher than the sphere would not be attracted with the same strength as the sphere. I was wondering whether that would cause the sphere to be accelerated more rapidly.
quote:I think I see what you are getting at, although I think you are still making a mistake, insofar as if the base of the cone is the same distance as the base of the sphere, then would not the centre of gravity of the cone be above the centre of gravity of the sphere?
quote:Originally posted by DoctorBeaverHold a hammer (h1) so the head is at the bottom. Then get an identical hammer (h2) but with the head fixed halfway up the shaft. Hold them so their bottoms align. The head of h1 will be nearer the ground than the head of h2, but the nearest point of h1 to the ground (the bottom of the head) will be the same height as the nearest point of h2 (the lower end of the shaft).
quote:I don't know for sure exactly how Galileo worded his assertion, but my understanding is that it pertained to the notion that two objects of different mass will fall at the same weight...
quote:Originally posted by OphioliteSorry. You are talking nonsense. The lead ball has more mass, more inertia, than the ping pong ball. It requires more force to accelerate it at the same rate as the ping pong ball. That force is available precisely because it is more massive.Observe; collate; conjecture; analyse; hypothesise; test; validate; theorise. Repeat until complete.