Freefall

(1/4) > >>

bluegray (January 28, 2010, 18:26:40 PM):
Ok, time to go back to school.

From what height must an average person jump off of to free fall for 3 seconds?
Lets make the person 70 kg and he is falling in a mostly upright position.


Hermes (January 28, 2010, 21:24:59 PM):
Galileo Galilei demonstrated that a body takes exactly 3 seconds to fall from the tower of Pisa, irrespective of the pope's weight.
Mefiante (January 28, 2010, 21:26:02 PM):
Too much information there, I think. Would a Newtonian dynamicist qualify as an “average person,” even in a vacuum? ::)

ETA: “The Pope?” Ratzi weighs a lot more than 70kg.

'Luthon64
st0nes (January 29, 2010, 06:49:08 AM):
ETA: “The Pope?” Ratzi weighs a lot more than 70kg.

In a vacuum thin popes fall at the same speed as fat popes.
Hermes (January 29, 2010, 15:41:25 PM):
...which does not imply that the vacuum in a freefalling pope condones condomes.
Rigil Kent (January 29, 2010, 20:33:21 PM):
44m. Hurts, huh?

Mintaka
Peter Grant (January 30, 2010, 13:35:08 PM):
In a vacuum thin popes fall at the same speed as fat popes.

I like it! It sounds so profound, almost Zen.
Irreverend (January 30, 2010, 20:03:43 PM):
Duh, youse ous just don't geddit. A pope's in-fall-ible... 8)
Peter Grant (January 31, 2010, 12:49:12 PM):
Duh, youse ous just don't geddit. A pope's in-fall-ible... 8)

LOL. This thread is just getting better and better!

You know, if popes could function as anti-gravity devices I could really some potential uses for them.
Mefiante (January 31, 2010, 19:51:07 PM):
44m. Hurts, huh?
Yes, s = ½·a·t² solves it with a = g = 9.81m/s². Still, somehow I had the idea, this being posted under “Fun,” that everything but the correct answer was called for. Now, seeing as the pope usually looks like he’s in drag, what would the height be if we use a vertically fallible pope and consider air drag? Direct experimentation with popes is not permitted.

'Luthon64
Jane of the Jungle (February 01, 2010, 06:55:00 AM):
Direct experimentation with popes is not permitted.

;D
BoogieMonster (February 01, 2010, 09:59:48 AM):
Direct experimentation with popes is not permitted.

What about an archbishop?
Rigil Kent (February 01, 2010, 12:00:14 PM):
Still, somehow I had the idea, this being posted under “Fun,” that everything but the correct answer was called for.

(My apologies for being so banal and unimaginative in the fun section. Although solving the problem was fun in itself. :D Promise to rejoin the banter the moment I can think of a suitable papal-newtonian response. ;))

Mintaka
Mefiante (February 01, 2010, 12:01:12 PM):
What about an archbishop?
Only if you don’t care about the accuracy of the answers. Anyway, if you pushed one of them off some height, he would immediately become an “arc-bishop” because it is impossible for clerics of that rank to follow a straight line, physically or metaphorically…

'Luthon64
Hermes (February 02, 2010, 14:36:08 PM):
Direct experimentation with popes is not permitted.

What a pity. Scraps of papal pulp could make quite a souvenir.
Irreverend (February 03, 2010, 19:07:46 PM):
What about trajectory measurements of a cannon-ized pope? Must we use smoothbores or are rifles OK?
Hermes (February 03, 2010, 21:04:27 PM):
I guess a rifled barrel would give a papal bull-et some extra spin.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Skeptic Forum Board Index

Non-mobile version of page