Timeline for What is the most efficient machine for translating gravitational potential energy of one mass into kinetic energy of a different mass?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 11, 2020 at 9:33 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Aug 4, 2014 at 10:22 | history | protected | Qmechanic♦ | ||
| Aug 4, 2014 at 10:19 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ |
edited tags
|
|
| Jun 25, 2013 at 21:18 | vote | accept | Ehryk | ||
| Dec 29, 2012 at 15:21 | answer | added | Cleonis | timeline score: 4 | |
| Sep 12, 2012 at 22:09 | answer | added | jcohen79 | timeline score: 2 | |
| Sep 12, 2012 at 21:59 | history | edited | Ehryk | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added sample
|
| Sep 12, 2012 at 21:34 | comment | added | genneth | @MartinBeckett: the question is not quite as vacuous (ahem) as it first appears. The problem is that whilst one can easily convert the grav. energy into the mass that starts off high, it's not so clear how to effectively transfer it to the other mass. For instance, all mechanical linkages (including eventually break-able ones) leave a lot of energy in the original mass (since the entire system gets accelerated together). | |
| Sep 12, 2012 at 21:33 | history | edited | genneth | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 35 characters in body; edited title
|
| Sep 12, 2012 at 21:25 | comment | added | Ehryk | I thought $m_{weight}$ and $m_{projectile}$ made it clear that they were different masses. Does the edit ask the question that I really want better? | |
| Sep 12, 2012 at 21:24 | history | edited | Ehryk | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Clarified Question
|
| Sep 12, 2012 at 19:47 | comment | added | dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten | The suspicion that he wasn't answering the question you meant is probably why Martin offered that as a comment rather than a "answer", but it really is the indisputably correct answer to the question you asked. You'll want to think carefully about what your requirements are in order to phrase the question you really want to ask. Probably best to edit this one rather than making a new post. | |
| Sep 12, 2012 at 18:23 | comment | added | Martin Beckett | They do transfer it into ke of the falling object - that's all you asked for! | |
| Sep 12, 2012 at 17:52 | comment | added | Ehryk | Those don't transfer the energy from a falling weight into launching a projectile... | |
| Sep 12, 2012 at 14:38 | comment | added | Martin Beckett | A cliff? Or a vertical tube in a vacuum | |
| Sep 12, 2012 at 11:08 | history | asked | Ehryk | CC BY-SA 3.0 |