# Physics question

angie88
Posers and Puzzles 11 Nov '07 22:45
1. 11 Nov '07 22:45
Hi,
I have a physics question which I posted in the General forum:

Thanks for the help,
Angie
2. 11 Nov '07 23:47
Originally posted by angie88
Hi,
I have a physics question which I posted in the General forum:

Thanks for the help,
Angie

and like I said, we need to know the mass of the rider, the bike, and the coefficient of static friction between the tires and the surface. without friction, the problem is impossible!
3. PBE6
Bananarama
12 Nov '07 03:45
Originally posted by rubberjaw30

and like I said, we need to know the mass of the rider, the bike, and the coefficient of static friction between the tires and the surface. without friction, the problem is impossible!
I just posted my solution in the General Forum , it seems to work just fine.
4. sonhouse
Fast and Curious
12 Nov '07 05:58
Originally posted by rubberjaw30

and like I said, we need to know the mass of the rider, the bike, and the coefficient of static friction between the tires and the surface. without friction, the problem is impossible!
Think of it as a linear electric motor held off the surface by a couple of mm, there would be no friction, only the force required to keep the 36 Km/hr velocity. Friction does not have to come into it at all.
5. 14 Nov '07 01:32
Originally posted by sonhouse
Think of it as a linear electric motor held off the surface by a couple of mm, there would be no friction, only the force required to keep the 36 Km/hr velocity. Friction does not have to come into it at all.
if there is no friction then no force is needed once it is already moving if there is a force it will keep accelerating because the net force would be greater than zero.
6. sonhouse
Fast and Curious
14 Nov '07 03:37
Originally posted by tomtom232
if there is no friction then no force is needed once it is already moving if there is a force it will keep accelerating because the net force would be greater than zero.
So what? The problem doesn't state how the velocity was achieved, only that it is there, so what if it comes from the guy eating too many taco's and FARTING his way round the track? Or has a big balloon blown up and the guy aims the spout out the back end of the bike, who gives a crap about that, you are just grousing, the bike is DOING X amount of velocity however it got that way and the problem is figuring out the proper angle to keep it on the same path. Not exactly rocket science here.
7. 14 Nov '07 03:50
Originally posted by sonhouse
So what? The problem doesn't state how the velocity was achieved, only that it is there, so what if it comes from the guy eating too many taco's and FARTING his way round the track? Or has a big balloon blown up and the guy aims the spout out the back end of the bike, who gives a crap about that, you are just grousing, the bike is DOING X amount of velocity ...[text shortened]... is figuring out the proper angle to keep it on the same path. Not exactly rocket science here.
I was just stating what was true. I hadn't really even looked at the problem when I made this post I was just correcting an innocent mistake so people in there first year of physics don't get confused.(not saying that you are in your first year just in case you thought that I was hinting at that).