Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweet Zness
Ok its been a long time, but if we are going to state that two cars moving at 60 KMH collide in opposite directions is the same as hitting a stationary wall isn't this incorrect because.
1. An object in motion tends to stay in motion. So two cars colliding isn't going to completely stop either object like a wall. Energy will continue to travel through both cars causing more damage than only one car hitting a stationary wall.
2. Kinetic energy is dispersed completely? Kind of like, when you throw a basket ball against a wall it bounces back with X force, but if you throw two basketballs at each other you cause more energy to be dispersed and you get more of a reactionary effect.
Im no expert, Im only trying to remember stuff I learned in school 20 years ago. If Im wrong, Im wrong.
|
Correct. On all counts. But the argument is currently only dealing with theory, not application. The real world has exponentially more variables to attempt to account for in these situations beyond just the two vehicles' speed and mass.
Losses due to heat transfer, losses due to parts coming off the car, losses due to wind drag, the list goes on and on.
So, first you have to explain the most basic stripped-down version of the situation before you can attempt to dispute the real life circumstances.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KXRM
Nope, no bolting into the ground needed. Again this shows how relative the speed is. Of course there are other factors that play into this that don't make them exactly the same but in the simplistic way to view things this is how it should be viewed.
|
Well, now you're talking about energy transfer. If a 120kph car hits an identical stationary car, then the moving vehicle will transfer roughly half of its kinetic energy into the stationary vehicle, and the two will begin moving in the same direction as the first vehicle was (assuming the stationary vehicles tires were already pointing that direction). The speed that they both end up going, though, will
not be half of the original moving vehicle's speed
Quote:
Originally Posted by rez333
I have a phD in astrophysics, so I say you're all wrong and I'm right!!
Seriously though, I appreciate people correcting my ignorance with facts, but one's qualifications have nothing to do with the merit of one's arguments. |
Right? I merely pointed out that I was also a civil engineer to show that two people with the same education level doesn't necessarily mean that it's applicable in an argument of this type
I should also point out that, Civil Engineers only have a very basic overview of the kind of engineering that goes into understanding crash physics.
