Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: Loss of KE



"While we're at it, would somebody like to explain
the "microscopic details" of why a piece of clay
is sticky as opposed to bouncy? Just how does it
dissipate the energy, microscopically speaking?"

Rhetorical, correct?

Clay is more similar to water than ice. "Freeze" clay and it'll bounce. I suspect
rather massive carts with lead collision surfaces would make sticky inelastic
collisions.

bc who's thinking thixotropically


p.s. not an answer, just a direction to look

p.p.s question of the day: why does lead not work harden?



"John S. Denker" wrote:

John Clement wrote:

1> The formalism that predicts the loss of KE is valuable because you can
ignore the details of the collision, and just know whether the two objects
stick together.

Yes.

cut

This posting is the position of the writer, not that of SUNY-BSC, NAU or the AAPT.