Talk:Projectile motion

Physics Start‑class Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Projectile motion part of physics

Well, Projectile Motion is something I learned in Physics. I am trying to find out myself. So I am not sure.

Vinny P. Projectile motion is a two dimensional motion under constant acceleration due to gravity. 182.188.168.232 (talk) 16:58, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs a LOT of work

Added the no-references template, but that's the least of the problems...

The Trajectory article has more details but it too is neither well-written nor well-organized, especially for someone who might consult an encyclopedia to try to learn a bit about this topic. For a standard high-school subject that one could expect students to look up here, these articles are, IMHO, really unacceptable...

For a far more detailed and accessible (I think...) treatment of this material, go to www.geogebra.org/en/upload and scroll down to and click on the /nikenuke directory. Once in there, click the /projectilePDF directory and a whole bunch of PDF papers will be available. These papers will provide a lot of analysis, some of which is beyond high-school level, but several of them should still be useful.

While in the /nikenuke directory, click on the projectile HTML files, with Java enabled, to run these simulations.

As time permits I will re-write this article, and see about the Trajectory one also.

[Sorry, I forgot to sign this the other day.] Rb88guy (talk) 14:39, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow this is confusing. --Guerillero (talk) 23:33, 23 November 2009 (UTC) there was no diagram related to projectile motin (sehrish shafquie)30 oct 2010 Projectile motion come different in equations but each number . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.163.26.101 (talk) 16:26, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What is R is the second equation? Stuff like that need to be addressed in an encyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.188.63.234 (talk) 21:22, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This article really needs some one who understands Projectial Motion to come in and explain it better and define all the variabrls, and explain all the diffrent reacurrences of V_0 The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 05:31, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

History of projectile motion

The article does not say anything about history. The equations in the article use gravity(each equations comes into air resistance) which was a value known to Galileo and calculated by him. Vector analysis is also used but that branch of mathematics is attributed to Gibbs and Heaviside who lived much later. Who worked and formulated the projectile motion equations then????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

ICE77 (talk) 02:59, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Air resistance should affect the horizontal displacement

We should ignore air resistance when calculating these things. But in real air resistance greatly affects the max. height and Range. But in the article under the section of 'The maximum distance of projectile', it is stated: Air resistance does not affect displacement of projectile. Is it true? I studied in many books that air resistance affects both height and horizontal distance.--G.Kiruthikan (talk) 15:29, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Projectile motion in art, where?

Can anyone work out what the Korean painting has got to do with projectile motion? The title (King Shooting Arrows) promises something to do with parabolic trajectories but I can't see any moving arrows. By coincidence the volcano just below the centre seems to be shooting out hot rocks with parabolic trajectories, but the text doesn't make any mention of that. --Heron (talk) 14:07, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merger Discussion

Request received to merge articles: Projectile motion and Trajectory of a projectile; dated April 2016. Discussion here. Richard3120 (talk) 19:40, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support There is no reason at all for there to be two separate articles on this same topics. Reywas92^Talk 07:58, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Don't merge These articles are both very scientific and physics related. They may appear the same topic to the average Joe, but I request a subject expert to confirm this before a merger please. 62.64.152.154 (talk) 15:26, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes....they are the same topic....one just goes into a bit more depth about a certain component of it, but a single article could cover them both perfectly well. Reywas92^Talk 06:24, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support as these articles cover the same exact topic. Also, have you considered proposing a merger for Range of a projectile. This seems to be covering another element of projectile motion. Hpesoj00 (talk) 12:26, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support a merge These articles are the same. Only a few details are specialized enough and could easily be incorporated into one article. Andrew. Z. Colvin • Talk 07:44, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - the articles address the same topic (projectile motion), from the same perspective (theoretical physics), with the only difference being content (and there are significant overlaps). felixphew (talk | contribs) 07:18, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Why are there two different articles about the same topic? Pauliexcluded (talk) 19:19, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support but who is going to cut out all those painfully typeset math equations? Are we teaching high school physics here? Is it appropriate to give all those (unreferenced, unproofread) mathematical derivations here? --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:50, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Curve of the Earth

How are the equations for projectile motion modified if the projectile travels a distance long enough that the curve of the Earth's surface cannot be ignored? Inkan1969 (talk) 04:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is not any apparent change in the calculation it's just that the formula is then linked with the formulas relating to gravitational fields and such.Fire blazr (talk) 14:14, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Physics

Show that there are two values of time for the same height during the course of flight of projectile and the sum of timings at which these heights are attained is equal to the total time of flight Monicakimaro (talk) 07:43, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pruning

Was it really necessary to delete 80% of this article? It did contain quite useful explanations/formulas, the code snippet was probably too much.