doubleh
Member
As a kid I tried a sling a bit. I had little idea how to use it and the only thing I ever hit with it was the ground.
force = mass x velocity x velocity.
Am I missing something?
What does the "g" stand for in "500g" and "1000g?" I'm asking because there are 7000 grains in a pound.Well, 500g = 1.1 lbs, 1000g = 2.2 lbs, so maybe the numbers aren't that far off.
So it's (mass x acceleration)? That's what this site says. Ah, well. It's been over 30 years since high school physics, so I don't feel too bad about missing that one. In any event, I still doubt that the force of a sling stone comes anywhere close to that of a .45, which I think is where this whole discussion started.Yes, indeed you are.
Because Force does NOT equal “mass x velocity x velocity.”
I wasn't trying to bamboozle anyone, so I hope that was a reference to the guy in the video. The running joke among lawyers around here is: I went to law school because I can't do math.Spoiler alert - it’s momentum. You know, that pesky ballistic metric which is actually conserved during a real-world, inelastic collision - unlike Kinetic Energy which is NOT conserved, but sure sounds great when you’re trying to bamboozle unwitting fools who don’t realize bigger numbers don’t always mean bigger performance...
It’s momentum... Not bothering to convert to traditional units, because the ratio remains the same either way: momentum P = m * v...
A 1/4lb stone thrown at 35m/s (115fps) = .25lb * 115ft/sec = 28.75 lbm ft/sec
A 230grn (0.03lb) bullet at 850fps = .03 * 850 = 27.9 lbm ft/sec.
So a slung stone has greater momentum than a 45acp.
Neither energy nor momentum are equivalent to the force applied to the target. However the force applied to the target can be calculated using either energy or momentum.Spoiler alert - it’s momentum. You know, that pesky ballistic metric which is actually conserved during a real-world, inelastic collision - unlike Kinetic Energy which is NOT conserved, but sure sounds great when you’re trying to bamboozle unwitting fools who don’t realize bigger numbers don’t always mean bigger performance...
It’s momentum... Not bothering to convert to traditional units, because the ratio remains the same either way: momentum P = m * v...
I wasn't trying to bamboozle anyone, so I hope that was a reference to the guy in the video.
Neither energy nor momentum are equivalent to the force applied to the target.
Well, 500g = 1.1 lbs, 1000g = 2.2 lbs, so maybe the numbers aren't that far off.
Kinetic energy and Momentum have a lot in common. They should have given that they're both made up of the same two ingredients (mass and velocity).Momentum remains conserved in inelastic collisions. Kinetic Energy is not. Force applied to the target can absolutely be determined by the momentum transfer (assuming means to “know” the velocity of the bullet upon exit).
Well, 500g = 1.1 lbs, 1000g = 2.2 lbs, so maybe the numbers aren't that far off.
Sadly, he uses both English and metric units some what willy-nilly.
Wit hall due apologies to the counselor, 35m = 35 * 39.37" giving us 1377fps. Which is some suspect for being supersonic.
Now, 125g (1929gr, circa 4oz) at 22-23m/s (8-900fps) equals rather a lot of joules., especially at 10-15m engagement range.
My brother still has his Benjamin.... he got it in the late ‘40s or early ‘50s.How about a 4.5mm?
View attachment 855154
Nope. Kano said the Romans used projectiles from 500gr to 1000gr. The gr stands for grains and it takes 7000gr to make 1 poundWell, 500g = 1.1 lbs, 1000g = 2.2 lbs, so maybe the numbers aren't that far off.
It was a reference to the wide-spread use of Kinetic Energy among the shootingsports world, which is, by and large, a meaningless metric on the business end, as collisions of bullets upon flesh and bone are inelastic, such kinetic energy is not conserved. Momentum, however, is conserved, and a far better measure of killing performance than KE. But people seem to like big numbers, and can relate to “foot-pounds” more easily than slug-ft/sec2, or lbm ft/sec.