So if an object in motion with the force of 1 newton hits an object at rest that’s 1 newton of force applied, yes?
Now if the object instead hits an object also in motion with 0.5 newton, will the first object hit it with 1 or 0.5 newton?
I asked for the experiment or the name of the physical principle. edit: because he specifically said they teach this in elementary school… I didn’t just pull that out of a hat… also they don’t teach impulse-momentum theory in elementary school…
since you’re just asking questions, it’s called impulse-momentum theorem. if you apply enough force to an object in motion over a long enough period of time, you reduce its momentum.
if you had fast enough reflexes, you could stop a punch to the head without it harming you by moving away from it at nearly the speed it was approaching you. while no human can reliably do that, moving away from any blow reduces the force of that blow by an amount that is measurable.
this is why funding education is so important, people. this is a simple concept that anyone should understand.
I’m not just asking questions I’m trying to show your claim to be false by insisting you explain yourself fully. Now that you’ve explained yourself I can explain how you’re wrong which I couldn’t do when you were arguing by insult and implication.
Your claim is dependent on a linear force application when in fact the picture makes it clear the relevant force is rotational. Higher forces occur at the tip of a swinging bat.
Well one, the baton wasn’t being swung, it was being brought down, and two, the protestor was moving away from the direction of the tip and towards the ground.
Oh. The baton being brought down on the guy wasn’t being swung. That’s what it is. Must just be my lying fucking eyes and personal experience with swinging things overhand ig.
Hey, just asking questions now, are you a product of the american education system?
your argument was that mine was wrong because the baton is being swung with rotational force instead of linear force. the baton was brought straight downwards. is that rotational energy, or linear?
regardless, you would be wrong anyway, because hooks are rotational and boxers still move away from them to lessen their force. I’m going to accept the decades of practical experience they have over the opinions on how physics works from some random person on Lemmy.
No. It isn’t obvious to me. In fact, I can see how at a particular sweetspot of moving away from the striking baton could concentrate the force in a smaller area leading to a “harder” blow. Perhaps you could explain it to me since I apparently was sick that day in elementary school.
edit: strikethrough. when I wrote this I thought the confusion was the common elementary school misunderstanding of the difference between the “force” and “hardness” of a blow, which did not turn out to be the case and this was just a non-sequitur.
Ok, so if you run into someone standing still, that will hurt a lot, right?
Now, if you run into someone else also running who is just a bit slower than you, that doesn’t hurt as much.
It’s the same reason boxers “roll with the punch”. If a strike comes to the face they will move their head to negate/lessen the impact
You’re assuming velocity remains constant. If you can run into the person who is also moving BEFORE THEY GET UP TO FULL SPEED, it hurts less than of you allow them room to get up to full speed.
Sure, but that wasn’t what the first commenter said. Moving away would lessen the force visavi standing still. Now if it’s better to move in or away is another question.
That’s a flawed analogy as people tend to run horizontally.
For that to “work” you’d have to move (faster) in the same direction of the baton – meaning downwards towards the ground. Realistically you’d end up on the ground, crouching, and still within reach of a blow.
It could kinda work if the trajectory is diagonal 'cos you’d roll away but you’d still be in an awkward position to avoid a blow.
It’s the exact same reason that hitting a parked car is a lot less bad than hitting a car going at the same speed in the opposite direction. Or why hitting the brakes when someone’s about to rear-end you is a bad idea.
So if an object in motion with the force of 1 newton hits an object at rest that’s 1 newton of force applied, yes? Now if the object instead hits an object also in motion with 0.5 newton, will the first object hit it with 1 or 0.5 newton?
I asked for the experiment or the name of the physical principle. edit: because he specifically said they teach this in elementary school… I didn’t just pull that out of a hat… also they don’t teach impulse-momentum theory in elementary school…
since you’re just asking questions, it’s called impulse-momentum theorem. if you apply enough force to an object in motion over a long enough period of time, you reduce its momentum.
if you had fast enough reflexes, you could stop a punch to the head without it harming you by moving away from it at nearly the speed it was approaching you. while no human can reliably do that, moving away from any blow reduces the force of that blow by an amount that is measurable.
this is why funding education is so important, people. this is a simple concept that anyone should understand.
I’m not just asking questions I’m trying to show your claim to be false by insisting you explain yourself fully. Now that you’ve explained yourself I can explain how you’re wrong which I couldn’t do when you were arguing by insult and implication.
Your claim is dependent on a linear force application when in fact the picture makes it clear the relevant force is rotational. Higher forces occur at the tip of a swinging bat.
Well one, the baton wasn’t being swung, it was being brought down, and two, the protestor was moving away from the direction of the tip and towards the ground.
Oh. The baton being brought down on the guy wasn’t being swung. That’s what it is. Must just be my lying fucking eyes and personal experience with swinging things overhand ig.
Hey, just asking questions now, are you a product of the american education system?
your argument was that mine was wrong because the baton is being swung with rotational force instead of linear force. the baton was brought straight downwards. is that rotational energy, or linear?
regardless, you would be wrong anyway, because hooks are rotational and boxers still move away from them to lessen their force. I’m going to accept the decades of practical experience they have over the opinions on how physics works from some random person on Lemmy.
Yeah and that was not the answer you got but an example. Do you follow why the baton would not hit as hard if you moved away? 😄
deleted by creator
No. It isn’t obvious to me.
In fact, I can see how at a particular sweetspot of moving away from the striking baton could concentrate the force in a smaller area leading to a “harder” blow.Perhaps you could explain it to me since I apparently was sick that day in elementary school.edit: strikethrough. when I wrote this I thought the confusion was the common elementary school misunderstanding of the difference between the “force” and “hardness” of a blow, which did not turn out to be the case and this was just a non-sequitur.
Ok, so if you run into someone standing still, that will hurt a lot, right?
Now, if you run into someone else also running who is just a bit slower than you, that doesn’t hurt as much.
It’s the same reason boxers “roll with the punch”. If a strike comes to the face they will move their head to negate/lessen the impact
You’re assuming velocity remains constant. If you can run into the person who is also moving BEFORE THEY GET UP TO FULL SPEED, it hurts less than of you allow them room to get up to full speed.
Sure, but that wasn’t what the first commenter said. Moving away would lessen the force visavi standing still. Now if it’s better to move in or away is another question.
That’s a flawed analogy as people tend to run horizontally.
For that to “work” you’d have to move (faster) in the same direction of the baton – meaning downwards towards the ground. Realistically you’d end up on the ground, crouching, and still within reach of a blow. It could kinda work if the trajectory is diagonal 'cos you’d roll away but you’d still be in an awkward position to avoid a blow.
Well, he asked how it worked, and that’s how physics work. Doesn’t matter if it horisontal, diagonal or vertical
Oh, and the first commenter just mentioned moving away
Yes, so imagine a spinning broomstick. What would hurt more, getting hit at the far end from where it’s rotating or right next to where its rotating.
Or a spinning fan. Does it hurt more to stick your finger in near the motor, or at the edge.
And that’s a separate question.
It’s the exact same reason that hitting a parked car is a lot less bad than hitting a car going at the same speed in the opposite direction. Or why hitting the brakes when someone’s about to rear-end you is a bad idea.
Bats and batons are rotational, not linear. The farther you are from the fulcrum of a rotating bar, the faster it’s moving.
That’s a valid counterpoint, and it really is all situational.
Yes, but this situation is a baton being swung.
Impulse.