3 ms·
The underlying assumption in this analysis is that the constant is 1. Maybe I should have clarified that in the thread.. Thank you for pointing it out!
by sinab 6y ago
The underlying assumption in this analysis is that the constant is 1.
Maybe I should have clarified that in the thread.. Thank you for pointing it out!
- contravariant 6y agoOkay looks like there is some justification for that assumption given by G.I. Taylor. By the way with your data it looks like you get a better fit if you assume your first image is not at 50ms but rather 38 ms. A line fit between t and r^(5.2) gives a slope of 1.6 10^13. This gives 4 kt if you use the lower estimate of 1 kg/m^3 for the density of air. I do worry you may have overestimated the distance slightly, as these numbers are frankly ridiculous, and with a power of 5 even small errors grow quickly.
- sinab 6y agoAbsolutely, I do think it is an overestimate. The angle of the video makes it hard to accurately estimate the size of the ball, and as you rightly pointed out an epsilon difference in size gives epsilon^5 differences in energy, so size estimates are extremely important.