Gravity made easy

[aybraus]

1) Make a pole that is 8 inches tall and give it a flat base.
2) Attach an 8" chain to the end of it.

Now, when you want to know how fast something is rolling down a slope, you just put the base on the incline, then measure the distance between the pole and the end of the chain. That is how far the thing moves because of gravity. Wow!

EDIT: I KNOW WHEN I'VE BEEN BEAT.

You can also calculate the same distance by taking 8cos(angle)"! Hooray for too much physics!

wrong, the diagram shows what you get if you calculate 8tan(angle)

this is why I find his way to be wrong.
I'll post a picture of what I meant later.

EDIT: which is now.

as you can see this method DOES give you the 8sin(angle) which is the component of gravity we're interested in seeing.
even so, HIS method is a nice approximation, but only correct if the angle is really small.

[Gorchek]

Nice! I'll have to keep that in mind.

[Rody]

of course the chain has to be the same length as the pole is.
and maybe it is more accurate to use the distance from the end of the chain to the pole.

[aybraus]

of course the chain has to be the same length as the pole is.
and maybe it is more accurate to use the distance from the end of the chain to the pole.

No it should be longer or else it won't touch the ground.

[Rody]

does it have to touch the ground?
I kinda like my own interpretation, and I can make it work for angles up to 90 degrees.

[warman45]

what your saying is like taking a piece of string and marking how far it is till it touches the floor?

[pesgores]

OK...will it help in anything?

[aybraus]

Post updated with "Helpful Diagram"

[warman45]

diagram really helps

[Bonn-o-Tron]

Strangely enough, that's almost exactly how I imagined it.

[IVhorseman]

You can also calculate the same distance by taking 8cos(angle)"! Hooray for too much physics!

[Rody]

You can also calculate the same distance by taking 8cos(angle)"! Hooray for too much physics!

wrong, the diagram shows what you get if you calculate 8tan(angle)

this is why I find his way to be wrong.
I'll post a picture of what I meant later.

EDIT: which is now.

as you can see this method DOES give you the 8sin(angle) which is the component of gravity we're interested in seeing.
even so, HIS method is a nice approximation, but only correct if the angle is really small.

[Ross_Varn]

I really hate math.

This wont help much in actual battle situations. If the string only works at up to 45 degree angles, then the difference is almost to small to be noticed.

However, i don't see why it wouldn't work at degrees over 45 degrees. If the string is long enough, on a steep hill the vehicle would slide up to 5 inches - which can make a big difference.

[Rody]

that, is why I don't like his approach it kinda accidentally goes to infinite length if you go much too steep. (tangents do that you know)
my method however is accurate enough at all angles. (to about 90 degree's further than that you probably won't be sliding any more)

[Ross_Varn]

90 degrees? Your vehicle is falling not sliding.

Correction to my last post, you can actually get a big movement going on a big enough angle.