Using your common sense to solve a physics problem.

Its enough if you know what your doing. If you just walk up to the seen and try to figure it out using common sense, I would need the wieght of the car, and some kind of reference for the Uk.
Using common sense, I would test the tires to see first hand how far they would skid.I only asked you that question out of curiousity, because I had a Dock building business. I took an average pontoon boat, and made a crane on the end of it out of wood. I used common sense to design it, and it did exactly what I thought it would do. It lifted a 4000 lb dock out of the water and I could drive it up on land (the dock) and set it down, So I was storing docks for the winter. I added floatation underneath the boat to compensate for the extra wieght, and the leverage factor of the dock being 4ft out in front of the boat.
I also added a water ballast system to the back, by caculating the wieght of water, and how much I would need to balance it.
Then I took a common boat lift motor and rigged it to operate the crane.
Worked quite well, and was the talk of the lake here. But the dock business as a whole sucks, so I gave it up. MY HVAC business is doing to well, and it makes more money.
At one point I wanted to make the crane out of metal. Steel was too heavy for the boat (wieght was a big factor in designing this) So I asked around about aluminum, and what it could handle, because I didn't want to guess. I had figured in my head about a 10" beam, but I really didn't know. The numbers I gave you was a little high, I would have gone a little smaller. Each arm really only neede to carry 2,000lbs, as there were 2 arms off the front of the boat,9 feet apart.The cool thing about the boat, was that it still went 20knots, and I could respond to sunken boat emergencies on the lake. We raised several boats, and I devised many methods to get them out, using my common sense that God gave me.

I am not saying for this problem that any of those variables ar going to make a difference. I am saying in the real world, use your common sense, or just read what I wrote.

Wait!!!
I made a mistake. I thought about it as I was falling asleep. I added the percentage the wrong way. I added it as if the car was going up hill.The answer should be 49.8mph.
You see, I want to solve the problem my own way, and you confuse me, because you want me to solve it your way. so without knowing the exact wieght of the car, I couldn't figure this out.Anyway its late, I am dead, gn.

What?????You mean I will role down a hill at the same speed regrdless of the slope? you obviously didn't understand how I was applying the grade to the formula.From you correction you would understand that the Uk will change on a slope, because gravity will have a lateral affect. Thats why you slide further going down hill.And V=(2Uk*g*d) is correct.
That would yield a speed 53.40MPH on level ground from a 30m skid mark
I was having difficulty apply the slope to the formula.

You can't put equations together if you don't understand them. Thats why I wanted to start from scratch. Then that would lead me to understand the equations.I wanted to understand how the Uk was created.
Then I wasn't sure what about a few other things. I almost got it from the equations, but it wouldn't have been a demostration of common sense to me.

I even remeber reading about that.
But you really didn't prove anything to me.
First off, I would never use the wrong size nut. We didn't discuss nut sizes, and you didn't mention anything about the size of the rod.You only said it was a rod. So it was a trick question with not enough information to give the answer you were looking for. If you used the right size rods, and nuts, then it would have worked exactly the way I said.Next question, try again.

riverrat was taken already, so I am Scripture Police.
I challenged you to a 2 game match.
Good luck, have fun.

Yes I must have expressed it wrong. But through common sense I realize what the slope is doing to the length of the skid marks.I guess the slope alters the Uk?
Do I subtract from the Uk, or change the rate of gravity to figure out the length of the skid on the slope?

Of course they would, we have learned everything the hard way. That is where I get my common sense from.I think your story proves my point. The engineer can miss something, where in that situation, if I was on the job, I might have caught it. I would have just looked at it, and said, "this ain't gonna work". Thats due to the common sense, or natural understand of pyhsics that God gave me, plus years of experience.when I say jerk scientist (and I never said jerk physists, or engineer) I mean the ones that tell us how we should live based on some survey. You know the surveys that change everyday on the news.I mean if your not a jerk scientist, you should know the difference if your not, why get upset at what I said? You know dam well there are jerk scientists out there. everyone has admitted that.
Its only because I'm Christian, that you choose to target me.The fact that I can even approach to solve these problems on paper, and I was a high school drop out, should tell you something.
I am more for figuring things out in the real world. Not to say I do not appreciate the math involved.I am really thankful for Lam challenging my brain, I enjoyed it tremendously. I look to understand it further, on paper. I also will say again, I do respect the scientist/engineers/pyhsists who aren't jerks, and you know who you are.

Sorry I left out the squared the second time.I think Idid write it wrong, but figured it correctly.g=32.2, without the squared. I put the squared outside the brackets to clear things up for me.The answer is correct for level ground?

What about discovery science channel, whats your opinion of that channel. I hear a lot of things on there that I don't agree with.I mean these are the only things that people like me who only casually obcerve science through TV, and popular science, and discover mag, are going to give us information.All these things are bad?

I know that.
I'm saying gravity is straight down. They use the perpendicular pull on gravity relative the surface of the earth to figure the force on the car. If gravity is not exactly perpendicular, its affect is different.You could take the angle of the slope and figure it in, or like I did, use a percentage to figure it in(I think).

Again, we didn't discuss nut or rod sizes, and I didn't engineer the whole thing from the start. Its called a trick question, and it didn't even give enough information to figure out the correct answer, like rod sizes, and wieght of the catwalk.Its just hogwash.

Oh how I hate the news. Its all BS.

I dropped out of 10th grade, never even made it through 10th. I was too rapped up in hanging out, and smoking pot, because my parents were to busy arguing with each other. Then I started working and never went back to school. It sucks because I could have been good in college.So I never even took physics in HS. I could however figure this whole thing out on my own, without any formulas, and just using whats at the scene of the accident. My common sense would lead me through. This would be a great undertaking, I know, and I will never get to prove it.But I enjoyed this problem so far. I fully understand all the forces on the car and what happened. I just don't know how to express it verbally, or mathematically using the formulas given.This still doesn't stop me from knowing what happened.
I want everyone to just stop thinking that I hate engineers, and scientists, and whatever. Thats not the case, and I have great respect for the good ones out there, as well as all the knowledge gained over the years from all the work done by the great ones.Thats all I can tell you from and its coming from a jerk Christian