Projectile Motion
Two independent motions happening at once, and what air resistance does to that convenient fiction.
Introduction
Throw something, and once it leaves your hand only one force acts on it: gravity, straight down.
At the very top of its arc, what is the ball doing?
Two motions, one clock
Gravity pulls straight down, so it cannot change the horizontal motion, and no force of the throw carries the ball along: the hand stopped pushing at launch. What keeps it moving forward is inertia. Split the launch velocity into components and treat them as two one-dimensional problems that share a clock:
The time comes from the vertical
Horizontally there is no force, so . Vertically there is a constant acceleration , the one-dimensional problem from the first lesson:
A ball leaves level ground at m/s, ° above the horizontal. How long is it in the air? Use m/s².
A ball leaves level ground at m/s, ° above the horizontal. How far away does it land?
Where 45° stops being best
On level ground with no air, the range is , so 45° throws farthest. Both conditions matter.
With air resistance switched on, how does the real trajectory compare to the dashed vacuum path?
What comes next
You split a throw into two motions that share a clock, and saw 45° stop being best once height or air joined in. Next we ask what forces actually do, and test the intuition that a moving object needs something pushing it.
Ideas this lesson took on
Each of these is a common intuition the lesson put to the test. If one still feels right, the section that tests it is worth another look.
- “The ball stops for an instant at the top”
- “There is a forward force carrying it along”
- “45° always gives the greatest range”
Finished with this lesson?
Progress is stored on this device only. There is no account and nothing is sent anywhere.
Research behind this lesson
- Clement 1982: The belief that motion implies a force in the direction of motion survives a full mechanics course in a large fraction of students, including those who can state Newton's laws correctly.
- Halloun & Hestenes 1985: Students arrive with a coherent, stable, Aristotelian-flavoured theory of motion. Conventional instruction leaves much of it intact: the formalism is learned alongside the intuition rather than in place of it.
- Wieman et al. 2008: Well-designed simulations can teach concepts more effectively than the corresponding real equipment, because they make the invisible visible and remove incidental difficulty.