Freefall Mass vs Weight

[daxwc]

Decided to make my own thread on this concept as stated before, that all objects fall at the same rate regardless of weight, so steal some of the weight to do work somewhere else during first part of the fall, while not impeding the fall. So if a 10kg mass falls 5 meters for example. For the first 2.5m you steal 9kg of weight leaving the mass actually weighing 1kg for the 2.5m without effecting gravitational acceleration of 9.81 m/s^2 and still letting the mass accelerate. At 2.5m you return full weight of 10kg back to the mass for the rest of the freefall, according to physics the mass should still have the same impact or energy at the bottom of the freefall.


I have drawn a picture of this concept...
Thinking along these lines, imagine a 5 kg weight tied by a rope to pulley, then to a 1 kg weight. You let gravity freefall the bigger mass till a little before impact, then release the smaller weight. Because all masses fall at the same rate no matter of the weight the smaller weight should not impede the larger mass’s fall. Just before impact you release the 1 kg mass. You now give back all the weight back to the larger mass (5kg) in time to make use of impact or momentum, at the same time you now need to harvest the smaller weight which got propelled for free as it whips around. The only losses so far are in friction of the pulley.
I believe this is what Pequaide was getting at but in reverse. Anybody see any flaws in my thinking? The problem of course is getting a simple arrangement made in a wheel.

[jim_mich]

Because all masses fall at the same rate no matter of the weight the smaller weight should not impede the larger mass’s fall.

Wrong thinking.

You have 5 pounds of gravity force pushing down on the left side of the pulley and 1 pound of gravity force pushing down on the right side of the pulley and this is accelerating 6 pounds of total mass. This equals 4 pounds of force pushing 6 pounds of mass. Thus by the time the left weight reaches the impact it will be traveling only 4/6 the speed of any normal object falling the same distance and its kinetic energy will be significantly less.

[daxwc]

yes, thanks Jim, you are right. I wonder what if the small weight got an extra push at the start. I am trying to find a system that multiplies the square of the acceleration of gravity, a pulley might be the wrong way to go. A system that lets me use weight without impeding the mass on its freefall.

[bluedanube]

Decided to make my own thread on this concept as stated before, that all objects fall at the same rate regardless of weight, so steal some of the weight to do work somewhere else ...

Yes, its a strange effect, that bodys fall with same rate independent of their weight. If so, that heavy body does not fall faster than lighter, means in my imagination,
that their bigger mass on the one hand produces more force to move but on the other hand needs more energy to move, to overcome the mass own inertia.

bluedanube

[bluedanube]

What comes just to my mind, and I ask myself, if it it can be useful,
Imagine 2 seesaw or rod
o) one has 1 pound on the left, 2 on the right
o) the other has 101 pound on the left, 102 on the right.
Both have the same unbalance of 1 pound, but the heavy swings slow and the lighter swings fast.

Maybe the unbalance of 1 pound must be set in relation to the sum of weight, so 1:(1+2) or in the other case 1:(101+102)

bluedanube

[Fletcher]

Blue .. jim_mich's excellent response [in blue] to a similar question on another thread "why don't perpetual motions wheels work ?"

Fletcher, you made a few minor errors in the above post.

Fletcher wrote: - Now take the gravity example - we now have two unequal masses tethered in space but affected by the gravity field - we release them & they fall to earth - although their masses are different they both experience the exact same rate of acceleration - this is strange because it seems the field can automatically compensate for the right amount of acceleration required, even though two unequal masses are side by side etc - where it becomes even more interesting is that no extra force is required to overcome inertia of the different masses when falling in the gravity field [i.e. vertically] -

Mass is just the sum of all the atomic particles within an object. Each particle is like a tiny sail. Each atomic particle gets pushed by gravity. An object that has more mass also has more atomic particle and thus has more tiny sails to catch the push of gravity.

Fletcher wrote: - where it becomes even more interesting is that no extra force is required to overcome inertia of the different masses when falling in the gravity field [i.e. vertically] - but were you to introduce a sideways component of movement then suddenly the force required to move them laterally equally must be different for both of them [to allow for inertia when not moving with the field].

But there is extra force being applied due to the extra atomic particle sails in the heavier mass.

Fletcher wrote: - In summary bodies falling vertically in a gravity field experience no inertial effects in that the field automatically adjusts itself to guarantee the same rate of acceleration regardless of mass or inertia which is quite different from supplying a force to move something sideways or outside a gravitational field.

No, the field does not automatically adjust. The push of gravity is offset by inertial resistance. Each atomic particle has resistance to speed change. Thus each atomic particle has both a gravity force causing it to accelerate and a inertial resistance force causing it to not want to accelerate. The difference between the two determines how fast each particle changes speed. It make no difference if there are ten particles in an object or ten billion particles; each paticle will accelerate at a speed that is determined by the force of gravity of one particle relative the the inertial resistance of one particle.

Fletcher wrote: - What can I conclude ? - that the gravitational force is the physical manifestation we measure or feel but because all things accelerate at the same rate [all else being equal] then gravity is an unusual field or gradient rather than a applied force per se.
No, gravity is the result of a constant force on each particle. Each particle is held back by inertial resistance. So each particle speeds up as a fixed rate depending on the strength of gravity.

Remember that objects on the moon fall slower while objects on Jupiter fall faster. This is because the force of gravity is not constant. It varies according to the situation. On Earth we just assume it to be constant.

Additionally, two objects of same shape & volume but different mass fall at the same rate in a vacuum - not so in air - take a lever & pivot one end so that it swings down - the heavier one will reach a higher velocity [all else being equal except for mass] because the terminal velocities for both are different i.e. the drag force is a smaller negative contribution in the direction of motion for the heavier lever than the lighter - so in air a heavier object has a higher terminal velocity & falls faster, IINM.