A question for those interested in physics...
Edwin
news:x7Vn8.1094$sO2.2...@news.xtra.co.nz:
> Firing bullets straight up is a common occurence in many situations
> (i.e. warning shots,
I would hope warning shots aren't a common occurance where you're from. ;-)
> shooting at the sky during a funeral for certain
> people etc.)
Shooting done for a salute usually is done with blanks.
> The question is: What actually happens to the bullet? Does it go into
> space? Does it fall back down? Does it burn up? None of the above?
It falls back down. I don't know how much harm a few onces of lead will do
if it falls on you. ;-)
Edwin
Edwin
news:christopher.lund-FE...@news01.chello.no:
> In article <x7Vn8.1094$sO2.2...@news.xtra.co.nz>,
> "Robert Bowmaker" <robert....@dse.gen.nz> wrote:
>
>> Firing bullets straight up is a common occurence in many situations
>> (i.e. warning shots, shooting at the sky during a funeral for certain
>> people etc.)
>>
>> The question is: What actually happens to the bullet? Does it go into
>> space?
>
> Unlikely. I don't think the bullet goes fast enough.
>
>> Does it fall back down?
>
> Yes.
>
>> Does it burn up?
>
> Unfortunatly, no.
>
> Not only does the bullet fall back down, but when it hits the ground,
> it's travelling at roughly the same speed as when it left the gun
> (minus a little for air resistance). I'm pretty sure people have been
> killed this way.
No, the force of gravity acting on a few ounces of lead can't accelerate it
to the same velocity it had by being fired out of the gun. If it could,
you'd never be able to fire the bullet straight up. The forces would be
equal.
Edwin
Dave Bird
>Firing bullets straight up is a common occurence in many situations (i.e.
>warning shots, shooting at the sky during a funeral for certain people etc.)
>The question is: What actually happens to the bullet? Does it go into space?
A bullet fired upward at an angle, especially a shallow angle, can
lose its upward velocity quite soon (because gravity is decelerating
it hard) while its horizontal velocity remains large (because air
resistance is decelerating it quite gently), often large enough to
kill or injure: people have been killed or injured in this way.
You should avoid firing live rounds into the air in built up areas,
as opposed to open country, because what goes up must come down
somewhere. Planned firing for effect e.g. at funerals uses blank rounds
Follow-ups considerably trimmed.
In article<Pine.GSO.3.95.102032...@esther.rad.tju.edu>,
Dr. Michael Albert <alb...@esther.rad.tju.edu> writes:
>They come back down, and they are quite capable of injuring people
>and damaging property.
>
>In the city where I live, a few years back a child got a very
>serious head injury (the bullet penetrated the skull) from
>a bullet apparently fired into the air for a New Year's
>celebration. (Sorry, I don't know the outcome).
-- . . : : ,; . : ' ___.
uno, dos, tres, |FUEGO| .:. .:. .:': :' .:':' :. . : (") #oH|
' ' :' : :' : .::. H_ ~~~|
< > __ ,;;,. \\::// R_) |
'-|"""(") {__}::===== ....'''' ' ' ' ___..\||/....L\. ...|
____||--|_'--/__\___ '' .--''':::::::::::::::::::::
\ / /////////////S.Coronado/////
;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^
LRon Hubbard is shelled by goats in hell <www.xemu.demon.co.uk/clam/ >
Elizabeth
>
> "Dr. Rev. Chuck, M.D., P.A." wrote:
>
> > David Squire wrote:
> > >
> > > "Dr. Rev. Chuck, M.D., P.A." wrote:
> > >
> > > > none wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > As far as comparing them to rain... Lead is a lot heavier than water and
> > > > > will come down quite a bit faster,
> > > >
> > > > Nope.
> > >
> > > If its in a pellet the same size and shape it will. The force due to air
> > > resistance will be the same in both cases, whereas the force due to gravity
> > > will be higher on the lead pellet, due to its higher mass - it is more than
> > > 11 times more dense.
> >
> > Does the name "Galileo" ring a bell?
>
> Does "in a vacuum" ring a bell?
>
> Galileo's result is true only in the absence of air resistance. You can try it at
> home: drop a feather and a ball bearing from the same height and time their
> descents.
>
> D.
If you ring a bell in a vacuum does it make a sound?
Elizabeth
Not Here
"Elizabeth" <booR...@greyREMOVErock.org> wrote in message
news:3CA2179C...@greyREMOVErock.org...
You probably know the answer to that one Elizabeth, but i will try to
enlighten all who don't know. Sound waves need some form of matter in order
to travel. Since there is no form of matter in a perfect vacuum, one would
have to conclude that the sound waves travel only through the object that
made the sound, i.e. the bell. Am I close?
> Elizabeth
b
in message <Zdqo8.232379$s43.54...@typhoon.columbus.rr.com>:
in space, no one can hear you scream...
--
beside...@last.com
V ybir lbh nyy. Lbh ner nyy fhpu fcrpvny crbcyr. Naq abj V unir gb xvyy lbh.
Rev Phylter
news:3CA2179C...@greyREMOVErock.org:
Technically, yes. In practice, no. There is no air to transmit the sound.
We hear it's vibrations (ring) but take away the air and it still vibrates.
--
Rev Phylter
ULC Ordained minister
Denizen of Darkness #44
AFJC Antipodean Attaché
http://www.rudraigh.com/afjc/regulars.html
Pray. To ask the laws of the universe to be
annulled on behalf of a single petitioner
confessedly unworthy.
Ambrose Bierce (1842-1914)
Rowland McDonnell
[snip]
All well and good, but how about stopping all this flippin'
cross-posting to irrelevant newsgroups?
Rowland.
[FU set]
--
Remove the animal for email address: rowland....@dog.physics.org
PGP pub key 0x62DCCA78 Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org
UK biker? Join MAG and help keep bureaucracy at bay
Rowland McDonnell
[snip]
Yes, but do please stop this excessive cross-posting.
Elizabeth
but IIRC, it doesn't make a sound. I guess we're talking about a closed
system, so the energy required to ring the bell must come from within,
and barring no other forces involved, the bell would vibrate
indefinitely. Now I wonder if there's a small amount of heat involved in
the transfer of energy. Anybody know? I haven't thought about this stuff
in ages!
Elizabeth
Timberwoof
Elizabeth <booR...@greyREMOVErock.org> wrote:
> It was sort of a joke question. I haven't studied physics for a while,
> but IIRC, it doesn't make a sound. I guess we're talking about a closed
> system, so the energy required to ring the bell must come from within,
> and barring no other forces involved, the bell would vibrate
> indefinitely. Now I wonder if there's a small amount of heat involved in
> the transfer of energy. Anybody know? I haven't thought about this stuff
> in ages!
The bell rings because someone hit it with something. Its ringing sets
up pressure waves in the air, and we can hear those.
In a vacuum, a bell might vibrate for longer than in an atmosphere
because there's no atmosphere to carry energy away from it. However,
internal friction of the moving metal will eventually damp the
vibrations (and heat up the bell).
Imagine this scenario: Rigidly attach a bell to the inside of a steel
container. Evacuate the air from the container. Then ring the bell.
(Okay, you can have an electromagnet with a hammer in there.) Assuming
that you and the container are in an atmosphere, and the container isn't
unreasonably thick, you might be able to hear the bell ringing even
though it's in a vacuum.
--
Timberwoof <timberwoof at infernosoft dot com>
http://www.infernosoft.com/timberwoof/motorcycle/index.html
a motorcycle faq: http://www.infernosoft.com/timberwoof/motorcycle/faq.shtml
arjay
> Elizabeth <booR...@greyREMOVErock.org> wrote:
>
> > It was sort of a joke question. I haven't studied physics for a while,
> > but IIRC, it doesn't make a sound. I guess we're talking about a closed
> > system, so the energy required to ring the bell must come from within,
> > and barring no other forces involved, the bell would vibrate
> > indefinitely. Now I wonder if there's a small amount of heat involved in
> > the transfer of energy. Anybody know? I haven't thought about this stuff
> > in ages!
>
> The bell rings because someone hit it with something. Its ringing sets
> up pressure waves in the air, and we can hear those.
>
> In a vacuum, a bell might vibrate for longer than in an atmosphere
> because there's no atmosphere to carry energy away from it. However,
> internal friction of the moving metal will eventually damp the
> vibrations (and heat up the bell).
>
> Imagine this scenario: Rigidly attach a bell to the inside of a steel
> container. Evacuate the air from the container. Then ring the bell.
> (Okay, you can have an electromagnet with a hammer in there.) Assuming
> that you and the container are in an atmosphere, and the container isn't
> unreasonably thick, you might be able to hear the bell ringing even
> though it's in a vacuum.
Nope.
You'll hear the steel container resonating to the vibrations of the bell.
(You /did/ say it was a rigid attachment?)
--
arjay
Denizen of Darkness #111
Damned by Dore #42
Ubi dubium ibi libertas.
Rowland McDonnell
> jean-franc...@ipricot.com wrote:
>
> > Le Fri, 29 Mar 2002 04:17:49 GMT
> > Chris Wiegand <wie...@alum.rpi.edunospamm> dit:
> >
> >> From your posts it seems as if you believe that no energy is required
> >>to move air particles. The work done by the air on the object will be
> >>equal to the area under the drag-force vs. displacement curve.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > How much energy do you think I should require to move you out of
> > comp.unix.bsd.* and stop all thoses cross-postings ?
[snip]
> just ignore the thread, how hard is that.
You're quite right. As Emily Postnews tells us in
<http://www.landfield.com/faqs/usenet/emily-postnews/part1/>:
Q: How can I choose what groups to post in?
A: Pick as many as you can, so that you get the widest audience.
After all, the net exists to give you an audience. Ignore those who
suggest you should only use groups where you think the article is
highly appropriate. Pick all groups where anybody might even be
slightly interested.
Always make sure followups go to all the groups. In the rare event
that you post a followup which contains something original, make sure
you expand the list of groups. Never include a "Followup-to:" line in
the header, since some people might miss part of the valuable
discussion in the fringe groups.
Rowland.
P.S. Or you might try:
<http://www.landfield.com/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1/>
Be considerate with your use of network resources. Your individual
usage may not seem like much compared to the net as a whole, but in
aggregate, small savings in disk or CPU add up to a great deal. For
instance, messages offering thanks, jibes, or congratulations will
only need to be seen by the interested parties -- send these by mail
rather than posting them. The same goes for simple questions, and
especially for any form of "me too" posting.
Rowland McDonnell
[snip]
> So you are discounting all the hot air in Washington DC in the
> vicinity of the Congressional Office Building?
Possibly, possibly; but do please stop cross-posting this thread to
irrelevant newsgroups.
Rowland.
Rowland McDonnell
> In article <3CA35B34...@Jhuapl.edu>, James....@Jhuapl.edu says...
>
> > > the energy requiered to MOVE the air is called resistance, try
> > > tstanding outside on a windy day. ry it again in a hurricane or
> > > ttornado. then tell us there is no such thing as air resistance.
>
> > No energy is *required* to move *air*, doofis.
> > Unlike "sciences" Big Fart, it just MOVES,
>
> Thank you Mr Aristotle, now explain how airplanes fly.
[snip]
This is, I think, only relevant to the physics newsgroups - could you
stop cross-posting to the rest of 'em?
Edwin
Gotta love the Net Cop. He probably makes more Usenet traffic
complaining about "off topic" posts than those posts generate
themselves. ;-)
Edwin
--
"I use MacOS X (and ported *nix apps), MacOS 9, YDL linux, and window$
(though not voluntarily). Why do you call e a Linux user?" -- Rick
Hatton, March 29, 2002
Rowland McDonnell
[snip]
> Oops! Forgot about that. I stand corrected. :-)
Well, you do now: do please stop cross-posting this to the irrelevant
newsgroups.
Thanks,
Rowland McDonnell
[snip]
> My posts do imply that. My posts usually are meant
> to *imply*, to *insinuate*, to *reinforce the believe* that
> people who believe that energy *exists* are
> clutching-at-straws, grasping-at-the-null-set MORONS.
Okay, but could you please stop cross-posting to the irrelevant
newsgroups?
Timberwoof
"arjay" <arjaykw...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
What do you mean, "Nope"? That's what I said.
--
Timberwoof <timberwoof at infernosoft dot com> Chief Perpetrator
Infernosoft: Putting the No in Innovation. http://www.infernosoft.com
"The opposite of hardware is not easyware."