try look at 4:00 with x0,25 speed, clearly the small ball is dropped later than the big ball, if they would be dropped the samme time, they would also hit the ground same time.
As a physics teacher, we always have to explain simple physics models under ideal conditions. Once this knowledge is settled, we can go further and add the forces that makes the theory match experimental results. Imagine explaining the equations of motion for free falling objects where the acceleration is Weight/mass-C_a*density*Area*Velocity² instead of just g. This is a differential equation which leads to an exponential equation instead of just a quadratic equation.
@@antoniogodinez8181 Is that high school physics? I live in Catalonia and I'm not familiar with foreign education systems. I don't have any list of channels ready. I should have one. Where are you struggling the most? The concepts or the maths?
I've never understood this concept. Since terminal velocity is a thing that means things do fall at different rates because they can reach different velocities, with the differences exponentially increasing over time. And if gravity is applied equally to each object then the denser object with more mass should have a higher potential velocity and move faster. What am i missing here?
Terminal velocity is due to air resistence, and in vacuum terminal velocity does not exist. Gravity is proportional to the object's mass, so the object with more mass recieves more gravity, but since the heavier the object the inertia, the two objects accelerate at the same rate. However, since the gravitational force is stronger for the heavier object, the acceleration of the earth towards the object is very slightly stronger, but the difference is about as much as the difference between the speed of light and the speed of a rat, so it is just considered as 0
@@tonylee1667 oh so basically everyone is too lazy to keep track of the small difference even though there is one. Which would become increasingly larger the farther they move. Yeah sounds about right for America. Also I was referring to terminal velocity but saying the potential for a higher terminal velocity proportionate to the mass increase
@@thebadluckraven8217 Not lazy of the small difference, it is impossible to measure that small of a difference in the first place, and if that much precision is required, we would use general relativity anyways
You should have placed both objects on a board, then just tilt board forward so they drop at the same time, also go higher- maybe a 7 story parking garage or something. Good luck.
I was thinking the same thing. But it wouldn't do to just have a board and let them roll down. You'd need horizontal board on a hinge (with an upright to separate the objects,) and a support for the board that could be pulled away at will, perhaps using a fast piston. Even then the board would impede the initial fall of the objects. So perhaps the piston should pull down the supporting board very quickly, leaving the objects instantaneously suspended in air (a la Wile E. Coyote)
Poorly designed experiment, no control at all and not isolating variables. If you were to conduct this properly, you'd have used uniform sized balloons, with different weights added to them. With other series of possible tests for isolating area as well as shape or weight distribution. afaik, air resistance is negligable in cases where the velocity is low, the cross-sectional area is small, or when density is high. Negligible meaning that force of gravity is proportionally much larger than force of air resistance
Are you serious.. You used two persons to drop things... how accurate you think they can perform the test? Especially on that small height.. Ideally two objects should be hanging on some kind of rope and by cutting the rope both object should start falling simultaneously. At least make an experiment with one person. In experiment like this every time one person will be late fraction of a second which will give incorrect result. Furthermore, you should use heavy and very heavy object to avoid the air resistance....
I noticed the same thing, but by using reference points along the way and counting frames they could compensate for the slow reaction time of the assistant. Ideally, both objects would be resting on a spring loaded platform that could be instantly snapped down, allowing both objects to momentarily "hover" before succumbing to the force of gravity, but that would entail much more cost and setup issues, for what is just a small experiment. And once again, the video frame rates against reference points easily allowed them to compare the results.
There is also resistance from the air that affected the lighter plastic ball. Regardless. All objects hit the same terminal velocity regardless of weight or density
A mass of an objet will reach terminal velocity and will not increase after it so, if different objects with different mass will reach its terminal velocity and always will be constant lets terminal velocity. For it the distance must be larger
@@rupamsarma4655 no, drop two objects in a vacuum. They will both fall at the same speed. There is a video where a bowling ball and a feather are dropped in a vacuum to eliminate air resistance. They both fall at the same speed
I’m can’t help but believe the massive mass of the earth makes the mass between the objects being drops insignificant. Even to ten thousands of a second. Earths mass is approximately 5,973,600,000,000,000,000,000,000 kg. So dropping a massing of 1000 kg vs a mass of 1 mg towards the earth in a vacuum would be so insignificant even cameras with the highest frame rates available to us wouldn’t be able to catch it. I believe if one were to be uninfluenced by the forces of gravity by any other object, and in a vacuum; a golf ball would hit a bowling ball before a grain of sand did, and it would be recordable.
That's not how this is working actually. Even if the Earth was small the same principle would apply. Essentially, the force an object experiences due to gravity is directly proportional to its mass (hence the concept of weight). Weight (Force) = Mass x Grav. field strength. But because acceleration of an object is equal to the force on it *divided* by its mass, the mass cancels back out again, and acceleration is *always* equal to gravitational field strength. Mass has no effect. Not "little", none. The only difference an object's mass makes, is to the rate at which the earth is pulled towards *it*. This does not factor into a side by side comparison where both objects are pulling the Earth the same way. If you did it as two separate tests/recordings, you'd be right; the mass of the Earth would be making this difference insignificant still, because the Earth is so massive it's barely pulled at all. Your golf ball/grain of sand scenario is actually a really good example of this concept, so let's examine it! Both the golf ball and the grain of sand would accelerate towards the bowling ball at the same rate, because that depends only on the field strength of the bowling ball. But the golf ball would pull the bowling ball faster, because it has a stronger field than the grain of sand. You wouldn't be able to detect the difference in speed between the golf ball and the grain of sand because there would be none, but the difference in speed of the bowling ball would be dramatic. There would be a difference in collision time because of the difference in bowling ball speed, but not much, because the grain of sand/golf ball would still cover the majority of the distance, and at the same speed each. The bowling ball would just come a tiny bit further to meet the golf ball, making it slightly quicker.
The practice gulf ball has massive holes which can affect the aerodynamic in accelerating or slacking the ball depending on the holes' position during falling. So that test doesn't count. The holes should have been sealed
Nah not exactly a true experiment. Plus one item floated because had air in it which is similar to a feather etc etc, hight and time dropped was not accurate
Asrat Mengesha Earth is not pulling! Earth mass creates curvature in the space-time (refer Einstein theory of general relativity) and obejects close by fall into the curvature. Coming to your second question, Why Bird able to fly? The ans is , bird able to fly only because air. Flapping creates more air pressure in the bottom of the wing and low air pressure on top of the wing. This counters gravitational force. More the mass, more energy required to fly. In fact if there is no air, bird/plane can’t fly (of course we cannot survive if there is no air:))
What matter maintains the constant /variable distance between objects in space if objects in space are pulling each other by "gravity"? Momentum, the momentum of each and every object in space? No. First, the earth is stationary, therefore, the momentum theory, in this case, is the just mathematical formula. Second gravity does not exist, we know that one way of observing the shape of the earth. Whether the earth is flat or sphere we cannot walk the underside of the earth or of any object.
You are a special kind of stupid. You realize you can look through a telescope and see planets both spinning and moving? It's not an outrageous concept.
"you are special kind of stupid" no. evidence: the earth is fixed, flat, and not moving. And all the stars, including the sun and the moon.are moving, in the same direction about the earth. thanks.
Asrat Mengesha That's why all the stars stay in the same spot which is how early explorers navigated. Also, why do the northern and southern hemispheres see different stars? We see other planets move and spin, nothing is flying off the surface. You are a special kind of stupid.
Do you understand how star constellations works? Human beings have been staring at the big dipper, Aries, Leo and so on for 1000's of years. Yes, they do technically move but we are so far away from them that from our perspective it's negligible. With the naked eye, you wouldn't notice anything. Mapping the stars is how early sailors and explorers navigated the oceans. IF the stars were moving all over the place that would be a pointless endeavor. You still haven't explained why the northern and southern hemispheres see completely different sets of stars.
![ลองสั่งของจากแอพ temu ถูกจริงหรอ?? ( part : 1/2 ) [โกงไหมครับ ep.89 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RTcZSQTiDZw/mqdefault.jpg)
try look at 4:00 with x0,25 speed, clearly the small ball is dropped later than the big ball, if they would be dropped the samme time, they would also hit the ground same time.
4:01 he let’s go of the smaller basketball a second later, they weren’t dropped at the same time so that discredits the whole test
He says they corrected for the slight lags in release times. Try listening to the commentary!
@@ramases1 Just think a freemason from the 1500's proved all this, hahaha, Riiiight. Lord Gravity is the masonic G.
My brain is constantly getting raped by what my teachers say vs youtube.
As a physics teacher, we always have to explain simple physics models under ideal conditions. Once this knowledge is settled, we can go further and add the forces that makes the theory match experimental results.
Imagine explaining the equations of motion for free falling objects where the acceleration is Weight/mass-C_a*density*Area*Velocity² instead of just g. This is a differential equation which leads to an exponential equation instead of just a quadratic equation.
@@MarcCastellsBallesta I’m failing Honors physics right now sir. Any videos or TH-cam channels you would recommend? Thank you sir and have a good day.
@@antoniogodinez8181 Is that high school physics? I live in Catalonia and I'm not familiar with foreign education systems.
I don't have any list of channels ready. I should have one.
Where are you struggling the most? The concepts or the maths?
@@MarcCastellsBallesta yes sir it’s high school physics and I’m struggling mostly in the concept.
he dropped em at different times
I've never understood this concept. Since terminal velocity is a thing that means things do fall at different rates because they can reach different velocities, with the differences exponentially increasing over time. And if gravity is applied equally to each object then the denser object with more mass should have a higher potential velocity and move faster. What am i missing here?
Terminal velocity is due to air resistence, and in vacuum terminal velocity does not exist. Gravity is proportional to the object's mass, so the object with more mass recieves more gravity, but since the heavier the object the inertia, the two objects accelerate at the same rate. However, since the gravitational force is stronger for the heavier object, the acceleration of the earth towards the object is very slightly stronger, but the difference is about as much as the difference between the speed of light and the speed of a rat, so it is just considered as 0
Also there is no such thing as potential velocity
@@tonylee1667 oh so basically everyone is too lazy to keep track of the small difference even though there is one. Which would become increasingly larger the farther they move. Yeah sounds about right for America. Also I was referring to terminal velocity but saying the potential for a higher terminal velocity proportionate to the mass increase
@@thebadluckraven8217 Not lazy of the small difference, it is impossible to measure that small of a difference in the first place, and if that much precision is required, we would use general relativity anyways
@@thebadluckraven8217 What do you mean "sounds about right for America"?
You should have placed both objects on a board, then just tilt board forward so they drop at the same time, also go higher- maybe a 7 story parking garage or something. Good luck.
Higher is best !
I was thinking the same thing. But it wouldn't do to just have a board and let them roll down. You'd need horizontal board on a hinge (with an upright to separate the objects,) and a support for the board that could be pulled away at will, perhaps using a fast piston. Even then the board would impede the initial fall of the objects. So perhaps the piston should pull down the supporting board very quickly, leaving the objects instantaneously suspended in air (a la Wile E. Coyote)
More like “failing” bodies
Poorly designed experiment, no control at all and not isolating variables. If you were to conduct this properly, you'd have used uniform sized balloons, with different weights added to them. With other series of possible tests for isolating area as well as shape or weight distribution. afaik, air resistance is negligable in cases where the velocity is low, the cross-sectional area is small, or when density is high. Negligible meaning that force of gravity is proportionally much larger than force of air resistance
Are you serious.. You used two persons to drop things... how accurate you think they can perform the test? Especially on that small height.. Ideally two objects should be hanging on some kind of rope and by cutting the rope both object should start falling simultaneously. At least make an experiment with one person. In experiment like this every time one person will be late fraction of a second which will give incorrect result. Furthermore, you should use heavy and very heavy object to avoid the air resistance....
The fellow on the left was kinda slow.
I noticed the same thing, but by using reference points along the way and counting frames they could compensate for the slow reaction time of the assistant. Ideally, both objects would be resting on a spring loaded platform that could be instantly snapped down, allowing both objects to momentarily "hover" before succumbing to the force of gravity, but that would entail much more cost and setup issues, for what is just a small experiment. And once again, the video frame rates against reference points easily allowed them to compare the results.
^ω^
minion
There is also resistance from the air that affected the lighter plastic ball. Regardless. All objects hit the same terminal velocity regardless of weight or density
That's what I've thought.
This concept is applicable in vaccum, where there is no air.
True, but they couldn't permission from the college Dean to evacuate the campus of all air.
Air has been evacuated from all of our universities for a couple of decades now…
hi i am steve from minecraft
first guy knows how to spoil an experiment. Look at his smirk while he does it. so evil!
A mass of an objet will reach terminal velocity and will not increase after it so, if different objects with different mass will reach its terminal velocity and always will be constant lets terminal velocity. For it the distance must be larger
They didn't drop at the same time
This most unscientific drop ever! embarrassing
I agree
Hey old professors. Miss that Guy!
Thank you very much!
dude this is wrong because the forgot there was air resistance
Elard 245 I appreciate their effort though
I knew my physics teacher was stupid. A heavier object does hit the ground first, its just common sence!
no he dropped em at different times
They should always let one person do the dropping. Letting two different people do it is idiotic.
Take that Aristotle
Thanks for the great explanation at the end!
it's wrong
Why object fall in same rate because if one of the object has greater mass so gravitation force will be greater so the greater mass must come faster??
@@rupamsarma4655 no, drop two objects in a vacuum. They will both fall at the same speed. There is a video where a bowling ball and a feather are dropped in a vacuum to eliminate air resistance. They both fall at the same speed
@@Matt-qv6oo Hi its I got the fact after analysing it that S = ut+1/2at² so falling bodies does not depend on mass 😊
Great vid..but I'm sorry, heavier objects seem to fall faster, not the same time. I think Aristotle is the one correct.
The most unprofessional experiments ever made.
Heavier objects will fall faster.
I’m can’t help but believe the massive mass of the earth makes the mass between the objects being drops insignificant. Even to ten thousands of a second. Earths mass is approximately 5,973,600,000,000,000,000,000,000 kg.
So dropping a massing of 1000 kg vs a mass of 1 mg towards the earth in a vacuum would be so insignificant even cameras with the highest frame rates available to us wouldn’t be able to catch it.
I believe if one were to be uninfluenced by the forces of gravity by any other object, and in a vacuum; a golf ball would hit a bowling ball before a grain of sand did, and it would be recordable.
That's not how this is working actually. Even if the Earth was small the same principle would apply.
Essentially, the force an object experiences due to gravity is directly proportional to its mass (hence the concept of weight). Weight (Force) = Mass x Grav. field strength. But because acceleration of an object is equal to the force on it *divided* by its mass, the mass cancels back out again, and acceleration is *always* equal to gravitational field strength. Mass has no effect. Not "little", none.
The only difference an object's mass makes, is to the rate at which the earth is pulled towards *it*. This does not factor into a side by side comparison where both objects are pulling the Earth the same way. If you did it as two separate tests/recordings, you'd be right; the mass of the Earth would be making this difference insignificant still, because the Earth is so massive it's barely pulled at all.
Your golf ball/grain of sand scenario is actually a really good example of this concept, so let's examine it! Both the golf ball and the grain of sand would accelerate towards the bowling ball at the same rate, because that depends only on the field strength of the bowling ball. But the golf ball would pull the bowling ball faster, because it has a stronger field than the grain of sand. You wouldn't be able to detect the difference in speed between the golf ball and the grain of sand because there would be none, but the difference in speed of the bowling ball would be dramatic.
There would be a difference in collision time because of the difference in bowling ball speed, but not much, because the grain of sand/golf ball would still cover the majority of the distance, and at the same speed each. The bowling ball would just come a tiny bit further to meet the golf ball, making it slightly quicker.
Physics fruit salad 🤣
Not for eating.
The practice gulf ball has massive holes which can affect the aerodynamic in accelerating or slacking the ball depending on the holes' position during falling.
So that test doesn't count.
The holes should have been sealed
Galileo was a mason, his tests were junk as well. Density vs Buoyancy, not the theory of Lord Gravity the masonic G.
জহতসাকজগডসেিুরীমনবআশ
Nah not exactly a true experiment. Plus one item floated because had air in it which is similar to a feather etc etc, hight and time dropped was not accurate
The title can be very misunderstood
There was delay in the release of some
Both reach same time
Love old TH-cam
The more the velocity, the more the friction/air pressure. The more the friction/air pressure, the longer time to reach the ground.
Otherway around
You should have had a better start signal hahaha
Hhhhhhhh
If the earth is pulling, If the earth has gravity then why is that the birds are not falling? thanks.
Asrat Mengesha Earth is not pulling! Earth mass creates curvature in the space-time (refer Einstein theory of general relativity) and obejects close by fall into the curvature. Coming to your second question, Why Bird able to fly? The ans is , bird able to fly only because air. Flapping creates more air pressure in the bottom of the wing and low air pressure on top of the wing. This counters gravitational force. More the mass, more energy required to fly. In fact if there is no air, bird/plane can’t fly (of course we cannot survive if there is no air:))
Why do dead birds fall out of the air?
Asrat Mengesha why can I sit my ass on my chair?
im dying xDDDDDDDDDDDD
why? because the gravity is pulling you?
Thanks.
phenomenon is Fact explanation is not.
put the video on 0.25 speed and you can clearly see the late fraction of a second of those hands dropping 5:24
Yi Liang air resistence
My experiments are more precise and they show that steel always drops faster than lead. The equivalence principle is wrong.
Awesome. This was so well done. Thankyou.
There is no vacuum on earth ! Ether was our medium
nice
they forgot there was air resistance
What matter maintains the constant /variable distance between objects in space if objects in space are pulling each other by "gravity"?
Momentum, the momentum of each and every object in space?
No. First, the earth is stationary, therefore, the momentum theory, in this case, is the just mathematical formula. Second gravity does not exist, we know that one way of observing the shape of the earth. Whether the earth is flat or sphere we cannot walk the underside of the earth or of any object.
You are a special kind of stupid. You realize you can look through a telescope and see planets both spinning and moving? It's not an outrageous concept.
"you are special kind of stupid" no. evidence: the earth is fixed, flat, and not moving. And all the stars, including the sun and the moon.are moving, in the same direction about the earth.
thanks.
Asrat Mengesha That's why all the stars stay in the same spot which is how early explorers navigated. Also, why do the northern and southern hemispheres see different stars?
We see other planets move and spin, nothing is flying off the surface.
You are a special kind of stupid.
The stars don't stay in the same spot. They are time. season dependent to be seen in the same spot.
Do you understand how star constellations works? Human beings have been staring at the big dipper, Aries, Leo and so on for 1000's of years. Yes, they do technically move but we are so far away from them that from our perspective it's negligible. With the naked eye, you wouldn't notice anything.
Mapping the stars is how early sailors and explorers navigated the oceans. IF the stars were moving all over the place that would be a pointless endeavor.
You still haven't explained why the northern and southern hemispheres see completely different sets of stars.
They didn’t drop at the same time...