Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Scientists find missing link between whale and its closest relative, the hippo
UC Berkeley News ^ | 24 January 2005 | Robert Sanders, Media Relations

Posted on 02/08/2005 3:50:43 AM PST by PatrickHenry

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 2,141-2,1602,161-2,1802,181-2,200 ... 2,241-2,242 next last
To: HankReardon
Scientists find missing link between whale and its closest relative, the hippo

Funniest headline of the year. Figures it's from Berserkeley.

2,161 posted on 02/14/2005 11:28:42 AM PST by Aquinasfan (Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: King Prout; WildTurkey
On one Apollo mission the astronaut dropped a hammer and a feather on the moon. Both hit the ground at the same time.

The force on the 5 kg mass is 5 times higher than on the 1 kg mass. They hit the ground at the same time because you need 5 times more force to accelerate the 5 kg mass than the 1 kg mass.

Well, there is a little gap to mention. It is not for sure that the accelerated mass is the same as the mass linked to gravitation. As far as it was measured the ration is 1:1 but not very accurate. But this gap would not interfere the problem above.
2,162 posted on 02/14/2005 11:30:55 AM PST by MHalblaub (Tell me in four more years (No, I did not vote for Kerry))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2159 | View Replies]

To: Aquinasfan
Funniest headline of the year. Figures it's from Berserkeley.

Not near as funny as the post from the creationist about the whales had gills till they moved onland and developed lungs so they could breathe out of the water ...

2,163 posted on 02/14/2005 11:37:28 AM PST by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2161 | View Replies]

To: King Prout
The force is proportional to M1 * M2.

If you lift one at a time, the force is constant as the product of the masses is the same, however, if you lift both, you have a three body problem.

M1 * Me /= M2 * Me

2,164 posted on 02/14/2005 11:41:37 AM PST by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2159 | View Replies]

To: MHalblaub; WildTurkey
lets doo the math, shall we?

set Earth's mass at 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 kilograms
set object1's mass at 1kg
set object2's mass ate 5kg

the classic formula for gravity is: f(grav) ~ (m1+m2)/d2

you can see that, if m1 is the mass of the Earth in both trials, and m2 is 1kg in one trial and 5kg in the other, there shall be an infinitessimal difference in the amount of gravity between the earth and test object one and the earth and test object two.

It will be so small a difference that the basic value of 9,8m/s2 shall not be altered in any practical way.

2,165 posted on 02/14/2005 11:42:51 AM PST by King Prout (Remember John Adam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2162 | View Replies]

To: WildTurkey

ah, I see.
cute :)


2,166 posted on 02/14/2005 11:44:24 AM PST by King Prout (Remember John Adam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2164 | View Replies]

To: MHalblaub
First: LOL!

???? I was agreeing with you :-)

2,167 posted on 02/14/2005 11:58:07 AM PST by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2160 | View Replies]

To: King Prout
Fg: Gravity
Fg = m1*mE*b/d²
not ~ (m1+mE)

mE: earth's mass
b: gravity constant
d: distance

Acceleration
Fa = m1*a

a: acceleration

now is Fa = Fg <=> m1*a = m1*mE*b/d²

=> a = mE*b/d²
or a = g = 9.81 m/s²

You see that any object gets the same acceleration independent of mass.
2,168 posted on 02/14/2005 11:58:14 AM PST by MHalblaub (Tell me in four more years (No, I did not vote for Kerry))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2165 | View Replies]

To: MHalblaub

a question on your symbol usage: is the asterisk standing for multiplication or addition?
I find it very unlikely to stand for multiplication:

Fg ~ 1,000,000,000,000,000,000kg X 5kg/(d X d)
is a hell of a big shift from
Fg ~ 1,000,000,000,000,000,000kg X 1kg/(d X d)
when, in reality, we know that the difference is trivial.

if it is addition, just use "+" and be done with it.


2,169 posted on 02/14/2005 12:04:42 PM PST by King Prout (Remember John Adam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2168 | View Replies]

To: King Prout

Actually, I think I made an error. If picked up one at a time, the 2# rock will fall faster?


2,170 posted on 02/14/2005 12:07:33 PM PST by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2166 | View Replies]

To: MHalblaub

But Mass of the earth is not constant if you get your rocks off of the ground.


2,171 posted on 02/14/2005 12:11:47 PM PST by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2168 | View Replies]

To: King Prout

It should be multiplication. The force on a 5kg weight is indeed 5 times as great as the gravitational force on a 1 kg weight. Since F = ma, which can be rearranged to a = F/m, however, the acceleration, which is the quantity that really determines how the weights fall, will be nearly the same. That is, for a 5 pound weight, both the force and the mass are 5 times greater than that for a 1 pound weight. Therefore the force divided by the mass should be nearly the same in both cases. Implicit in this treatment is the assumption that the mass as determined by gravitational force is the same mass as determined by accelerating an object. In physics speak, we are assuming that the gravitational and inertial masses have the same value. The fact that they do has been confirmed experimentally to a precision on the order of a couple of tenths of a percent. Theoretically, the theory of general relativity is based on the equivalence principle which maintains that there is no difference between a gravitational field and any other type of acceleration. This implies that the inertial and gravitational masses must indeed be identical. If they are not, then relativity is in serious trouble as is most of our current understanding of the universe.


2,172 posted on 02/14/2005 12:15:15 PM PST by stremba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2169 | View Replies]

To: MHalblaub; WildTurkey; stremba
You see that any object gets the same acceleration independent of mass.

mass and gravity are independent? really? hrmn... lets play with the equation a bit... using a constant test object of 10kg, a constant drop height of 10m, and two planets of widely divergent mass.

Mass of Planet One = Mp1 = 30,000,000,000,000,000,000,000kg
Mass of Planet One = Mp2 = 5,000,000,000,000,000,000,000kg
Mass of Test Object = Mto = 10kg
Distance of fall = d = 10m

The math suggests that mass is cardianally relevant to gravity

2,173 posted on 02/14/2005 12:22:50 PM PST by King Prout (Remember John Adam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2168 | View Replies]

To: stremba

you are trying to make my head hurt, again.


2,174 posted on 02/14/2005 12:26:26 PM PST by King Prout (Remember John Adam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2172 | View Replies]

To: King Prout

If you have two objects of different masses and measure the gravitational acceleration of these masses due to a third body, you will measure the same acceleration for both masses. In your example, the acceleration of planets 1 and 2 due to the 10 kg test mass will indeed be the same (and immeasurably small). Don't forget that gravity is a two-way attraction. The 10 kg mass exerts the same force on the planet as the planet does on the 10 kg mass. In your example, the force exerted by the 10 kg mass on planet one is six times greater than the force exerted by the test mass on planet two. The mass of planet one is also six times greater than the mass of planet two. If you calculate the acceleration of each planet, you will find that for planet two, it's F/m, where F is the force exerted on planet one by the test mass and m is the mass of planet two. For planet one, this acceleration is then 6F/6m = F/m. Physically speaking, this is exactly the same situation as the one in which there are two test masses being attracted by the same planet. In that case, the acceleration of the planet will be different depending on which test mass is under consideration, but the acceleration of the two test masses is equivalent. In your last example, it is the acceleration of the planets that is equivalent. The test mass undergoes different accelerations depending on which planet is under consideration.


2,175 posted on 02/14/2005 12:35:20 PM PST by stremba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2173 | View Replies]

To: King Prout

Sorry for the headaches. LOL


2,176 posted on 02/14/2005 12:35:55 PM PST by stremba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2175 | View Replies]

To: stremba

ok, done a little research/refresher

G, the proportion (not the force), is a universal constant
quote: "The constant of proportionality G is known as the universal gravitational constant. It is termed a "universal constant" because it is thought to be the same at all places and all times, and thus universally characterizes the intrinsic strength of the gravitational force."

the force of gravity (Fg) is directly proportional to the product(ok, that's multiplication) of the masses in question
the force of gravity is inversely proportional to the square of the distance separating the centers of the masses in question.

maybe I'm just thick in the head, but it persists in looking like a 5kg mass would fall 10m on Earth marginally faster than would a 1kg mass, all other factors being set as equal.


2,177 posted on 02/14/2005 12:51:32 PM PST by King Prout (Remember John Adam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2175 | View Replies]

To: King Prout

Fg1 = GM1Me/r2 = M1 * a1
a1 = GMe/r2

Fg2 = GM2Me/r2 = M2 * a2
a2 = GMe/r2

a1=a2

For the case the two objects are dropped at the same time.


2,178 posted on 02/14/2005 1:04:24 PM PST by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2177 | View Replies]

To: King Prout
"assuming air resistance is not a factor, the 10"lb" weight would hit the ground sooner than the 2"lb" weight by an immeasurably infinitessimal amount of time, as the gravity constant is actually a sum of those of the masses in question (earth's and that of the object)"

I see you found your physics texts.

You are more knowledgeable than I am in the area of physics so I will defer to your opinion.

The point I was was making, and that you obviously understood, was that most people would believe that the heavier object would fall noticeably faster and that it is just 'common sense' that it do so. I find that 'common sense' really gets in the way of science education. It would be nice if the education system could encourage students to think a little more critically.

2,179 posted on 02/14/2005 1:21:46 PM PST by b_sharp (Atheist does not mean liberal and Scientist does not mean communist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2154 | View Replies]

To: King Prout
The acceleration on 1 kg mass (m1) or 5 kg mass (m2) is the same but the acceleration of the earth is different :-P

So after convincing you that both masses are accelerated in the same way - that is indeed true - I must admit that m2 hits the earth earlier because the mass accelerating the earth is different. Time difference is really small. The time to fall is 1.4 seconds.

t = sqrt(2s/g)
t: time
s: way
g: earth acceleration

or s = 1/2 gt²

Now calculate how far the earth will move in this time and you can estimate how big the difference will is:-)
2,180 posted on 02/14/2005 1:24:33 PM PST by MHalblaub (Tell me in four more years (No, I did not vote for Kerry))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2177 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 2,141-2,1602,161-2,1802,181-2,200 ... 2,241-2,242 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson