phy201
Your 'cq_1_07.1' report has been received. Scroll down through the document to see any comments I might have inserted, and my final comment at the end.
** **
Revision to 7.1
cq_1_071
phy201
your 'cq_1_07.1' report has been received. Scroll down through the document to see any comments I might have inserted, and my final comment at the end.
** **
Seed 7.1
A ball falls freely from rest at a height of 2 meters. Observations indicate that the ball reaches the ground in .64 seconds.
Based on this information what is its acceleration?
answer/question/discussion: ->->->->->->->->->->->-> : ->->->->->->->->->->->-> :
'ds= 2meters
v0= 0
'dt= .64seconds
'ds= (v0 + vf )/2 * 'dt
vf= 2 'ds - v0 /'dt
vf= (2 * 2m) - 0 m/s / .64s
vf= 4m - 0 m/s / .64s
vf= 6.25 m/s
a= 'dv / 'dt
a= 6.25 m/s- 0m/s / .64s
a= 9.77 m/s^2
#$&*
Is this consistent with an observation which concludes that a ball dropped from a height of 5 meters reaches the ground in 1.05 seconds?
answer/question/discussion: ->->->->->->->->->->->-> : ->->->->->->->->->->->-> :
'ds = 5m
'dt = 1.05s
'ds = vave * 'dt
'ds= 3.125m/s * 1.05s
'ds= 3.28m
It's not clear where you got 3.125 m/s.
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
I was using the average velocity from the previous question, I am not sure why I thought this was appropriate I misundersood.BUt I understand the solution
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
no this is not consistant uing the final velocity of 6.25m/s starting out initially at 0 in the time given of 1.05 seconds.
#$&*
Are these observations consistent with the accepted value of the acceleration of gravity, which is 9.8 m / s^2?
answer/question/discussion: ->->->->->->->->->->->-> : ->->->->->->->->->->->-> :
Yes, the ball when dropped from 2 meters had an acceleration rate of 9.8 m/s^2. This is consistent since the ball is free falling.
#$&*
** **
about 30 minutes
** **
Your first acceleration is good; not sure how you got the second but the method you used for the first would have worked.
** **
** **
This is the revision to seed question 7.1
Thanks
&#Your work looks good. Let me know if you have any questions. &#