Man linked/arrested to death from 'falling bullet'

[alexeikgb]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: edro13
Wow... I didn't think a bullet had that much forcing falling back down. I thought Myth Busters debunked that using coins? Does the bullet have a certain set velocity rate when it is falling?

A bullet will have the same speed going up as it does coming down. SO if it travels at 100mph out of the gun that is 5 feet off the ground, it will also be travling at 100mph when it comes down at around the same level it left off at, 5 feet. Now of course it may change depending on angle, wind speed, and other factors. But none the less, a bullet goes up, it must come down.

Proof that a little knowledge of something complicated rarely leads one to an understanding of the topic

Here is a article written about it.

http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a950414b.html

Just backs up what I was getting into, if in a vacuum then it will be the same speed, BUT because of resistance of the air, its terminal velocity, it will be slower, but still enough to probable hurt and/or kill ya.

No. If you fire a projectile vertically from a gravity source then the rules of terminal velocity will still apply. The gravity would only have a certain force on the object, when it loses all it's kinetic energy. It would begin to be drawn by gravity, the object would reach TV and once reached it would accelerate no more.

The object cannot have 'velocity memory' such as you suggest in the first post.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.

Yup.... correct..... the bullet will not exceed TV, which is much less than the initial velocity when fired from the gun.

 

[desy]

Oh Noggin
Wrong, go over this part again
" the impulse from the explosion of gunpowder creates an initial velocity much higher than whatever drag-limited terminal velocity the bullet achieves on the way back down."

" a .30 caliber bullet weighing .021 pounds. Using a special rig, the testers shot the bullet straight into the air. It came down bottom (not point) first at what was later computed to be about 300 feet per second. "With the [.021 pound] bullet, this corresponds to an energy of 30 foot pounds,"

So the fastest it goes is about 300 ft per second ,when they are initally fired at almost 3000 ft per second

 

[EyeMWing]

Originally posted by: rh71

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: edro13
Wow... I didn't think a bullet had that much forcing falling back down. I thought Myth Busters debunked that using coins? Does the bullet have a certain set velocity rate when it is falling?

A bullet will have the same speed going up as it does coming down. SO if it travels at 100mph out of the gun that is 5 feet off the ground, it will also be travling at 100mph when it comes down at around the same level it left off at, 5 feet. Now of course it may change depending on angle, wind speed, and other factors. But none the less, a bullet goes up, it must come down.

I'm skeptical about this... what happened to 9.8m/s^2... that wouldn't apply going both ways... only 1... coming back down.

It applies both ways - as the deceleration. So it WILL reach the same speed. Do the math.

 

[Kyteland]

Originally posted by: Gibson486
Wow, it astounds me on how people want to become so right, that they just state the obvious hoping they can get away without being wrong.

Well no sh!t sherlock. We all know you can't ignore stuff like resistance. However, we are talking about theory here. When you talk about theory, we don't talk about outside factors. Even when you are in college, they tell you to ignore air resistance when you learn about projectile motion.

You don't teach a person paragraphs with out learning sentences.

Since when are we talking about theory? We are talking about some dumbass actually taking a gun and shooting it in the air. You can't use the bullshit "Assuming a point mass is shot from a frictionless gun in a vacuum, what is it's velocity when it hits the poor schmuck a mile away?" argument. The bullet will never return to its exit velocity in this case.

 

[edro]

Originally posted by: EyeMWing

Originally posted by: rh71

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: edro13
Wow... I didn't think a bullet had that much forcing falling back down. I thought Myth Busters debunked that using coins? Does the bullet have a certain set velocity rate when it is falling?

A bullet will have the same speed going up as it does coming down. SO if it travels at 100mph out of the gun that is 5 feet off the ground, it will also be travling at 100mph when it comes down at around the same level it left off at, 5 feet. Now of course it may change depending on angle, wind speed, and other factors. But none the less, a bullet goes up, it must come down.

I'm skeptical about this... what happened to 9.8m/s^2... that wouldn't apply going both ways... only 1... coming back down.

It applies both ways - as the deceleration. So it WILL reach the same speed. Do the math.

Nooo.... it won't! You people are retarded. Lets use another set of items instead of a bullet to show how much environmental variables play on it.

Lets say you shoot a styrofoam peanut at 3000 ft/sec. into the air, you're saying it will hit the ground at 3000 ft/sec.? I don't need a physics book to tell me the answer to that.

Yes, a small dense bullet would not be a drastic as that, but over distance, the bullet would deifnitely be slowed dramatically.

 

[edro]

Here was a scientific study on it!

Based on the results of these tests it was concluded that the bullet return velocity was about 300 f.p.s. For the 150 gr. bullet this corresponds to an energy of 30 foot pounds. Earlier the Army had determined that, on the average, it required 60 foot pounds of energy to produce a disabling wound.

Hmmm.... from 2700 fps to 300 fps... we rest our case.