/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.15712051]

>science tells us if you drop a bowling ball and a feather on the earth, they will accelerate at the same speed ([math]9.8m/s^2[/math]
>so if you drop something much heavier, like Jupiter (ignoring it tearing the Earth apart), it will still accelerate at [math]9.8m/s^2[/math]? But Jupiter has a much stronger gravitational pull and the Earth should accelerate towards it at [math]24.79m/s^2[/math], making it fall much faster.

[Anonymous No.15712059]

>he doesn't know

[Anonymous No.15712087]

>>15712051
All scientific statements only work within the axiomatic framework.

For gravity on Earth, one of the axioms is that the objects in question have negligible mass compared to Earth.

[Anonymous No.15712126]

>>15712051
Yes but also no. Since Jupiter would accelerate toward Earth due to Earth's gravity, not its own, it will accelerate toward Earth much slower than Earth accelerates toward Jupiter. However, because gravity is an inverse square law, Jupiter's acceleration will be slower than 9.8 m/s^2, and Earth's acceleration will be slower than 24.79 m/s^2.

[Anonymous No.15712145]

>>15712126
Isn't this distinction meaningless, since to an outside observer you wouldn't be able to tell the difference?

[Anonymous No.15712175]

>>15712145
Well, no, assuming you're stationary relative to the Earth-Jupiter system's barycenter.
But even if you aren't, that doesn't mean you can't tell the difference. Consider Jupiter and its moons. Jupiter hardly even budges as its moons circle around it. Or consider the Sun, which wobbles a bit due to the gas giants' gravity, but a very tiny amount compared to the gas giants' massive orbits.

[Anonymous No.15712271]

>>15712175
well obviously the earth would move faster. but they would still be accelerating towards each other faster than 9.8m/s^2. so it's a difference without a distinction

[Anonymous No.15712391]

>>15712051
That is for small masses compared to the Earth, and very close to the surface.

For anything else use this equation instead: F=G*m1*m2/r^2

[Anonymous No.15713503]

>>15712087
>>15712391
/thread, ignore the other retard
you have your answer OP

[Anonymous No.15713508]

>>15713503
>>15712087
then why do people say it as if it's true in all cases? and in that case, shouldn't the bowling ball and a feather have a difference in how much the accelerate the earth towards them, even if it's imperceptible?

[Anonymous No.15713557]

>>15713508
As the saying goes, all models are wrong but some are useful. However, any physicist (and probably most high schoolers) would be aware that Newton's third law applies to gravitational attraction, so I don't know who this "science" and "people" you refer to are.

They would also be rational enough to point out that in the limit of very unequal masses, we can ignore the motion of the planet which is in any case a far smaller effect than other sources of inaccuracy such as air resistance or the non-uniform value of g across the globe.

If you wanted proper nitpicking you might as well note that Newtonian gravity itself is an approximation.

[Anonymous No.15714098]

>>15713508
They assume you are smart enough to know the axioms, you dumb fucking dipshit. This is grade school science knowledge.

[Anonymous No.15714412]

>>15713557
>I don't know who this "science" and "people" you refer to are.
Things like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E43-CfukEgs where it is presented as an absolute fact. Even on /sci/ I've seen this posted.

[Anonymous No.15714742]

>>15713508
That is main stream media for you: filled with morons loyal to their masters and completely ignorant and stupid. Only imbeciles still watch and hear them.

[Anonymous No.15715956]

>>15712051
KILL YOURSELF
IQ TESTS INSTEAD OF CAPTCHAS FOR POSTING HERE GOOOKMOOOOOOT YOU NIGGEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRRR