[HN Gopher] How far can you jump from a swing? ___________________________________________________________________ How far can you jump from a swing? Author : alexmolas Score : 90 points Date : 2023-08-29 20:26 UTC (2 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.alexmolas.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.alexmolas.com) | amluto wrote: | > The paper proceeds by assuming the swinger pumps the swing by | forcing [sinusoidal pumping]. | | I doubt that's particularly close to optimal. I've generally | assumed, without proof, that the optimal pumping strategy is to | change one's position abruptly at the highest point. The | intuition is that this delivers all of the fixed amount of | available angular displacement at the position in which it adds | the most energy to the system. | version_five wrote: | There could be some dynamics I'm overlooking that make your | theory work. Normally with a resonant system, energy | essentially gets added near the resonant frequency and it acts | as a bandpass filter for everything else, so my guess is it's | only the first harmonic of whatever jerking motion you try | that's actually contributing energy. | | As I say, that's really for a simple oscillator, there may be | something about the swing system that gives it an impulse | response that matches what you are describing. | | Edit: I wonder if the abrupt change is better simply because it | lets a person maximize the amplitude of the push they give, so | more energy goes in at the first harmonic anyway. That's | probably the explanation. | amluto wrote: | But the process isn't energy-limited -- it's displacement | limited. Your arms have a certain length, your body has a | certain mass distribution, and you can force the _angle_ by a | certain amount. | | So, if you want a heuristic, integrate pumping displacement | times swing position, where the pumping displacement has a | fixed maximum. The result is maximized by a square wave. | helf wrote: | [dead] | thedanbob wrote: | As an avid swing jumper in my youth I can say with some certainty | that 3m is closer to the mark than 2. Also, my brother and I | devised a variant that would work for the winter Olympics: jump | at the lowest point of the swing for maximum velocity and slide | over the snow. | dgfitz wrote: | I agree, and in my experience the taller the swing in terms of | rope/chain length, the further I could jump. | estebarb wrote: | I came to say too that 3m is more realistic, from what I did in | school. Also, around 1-2m is possible if you jump backwards, | but you may end up visiting the hospital as well. | | At my school the swing was near a clift, so sometimes you were | able to combine swing jump, ski jump and hospital visit with a | single jump. Good times XD | amelius wrote: | Arbitrarily far if you jump if the swing is furthest back. | amluto wrote: | That's a good point. I assume the author meant jumping by | ejecting oneself with no momentum transfer. But winning a | competition by following the unstated rules isn't always the | right choice :) | | You can also jump arbitrarily far by jumping off the swing at | its lowest point. | checkyoursudo wrote: | Alternatively, infinitely far (into stable orbit) if the swing | is tall enough and you have enough momentum. | _fs wrote: | I was curious, so chat GPT to the rescue: | | you would need a swing that is bigger than the Earth itself. | The reason is that the gravitational force of the Earth | decreases with distance, so as you go higher, the force | pulling you back becomes weaker. This means that your | potential energy increases as you go higher. To reach a | certain height, you need to have enough kinetic energy to | overcome the potential energy at that height. The kinetic | energy depends on your mass and your speed squared, while the | potential energy depends on your mass and the gravitational | constant and the mass and radius of the Earth. If we assume | that your mass is 70 kg and your speed is 3.07 km/s (the | orbital speed at geostationary orbit), then we can calculate | how high you can go by equating your kinetic energy and | potential energy | | Therefore, to reach geostationary orbit by jumping off a | swing, you would need a swing that is longer than 32.63 | million meters (the difference between geostationary orbit | altitude and your maximum height). This is more than five | times longer than the diameter of the Earth (12.74 million | meters). Such a swing would not be possible to build or use. | | > If it was possible to build, how long would you have to | pump the swing before you could jump off into orbit | | That is a very hypothetical question, since it is impossible | to build such a long swing or pump it fast enough to reach | orbital speed. However, for the sake of curiosity, let us | assume that you have a swing that is 32.63 million meters | long, and you can pump it with the same frequency and phase | as the natural frequency of the swing. In other words, you | can apply the maximum possible force to the swing at every | turn. | | This means that one complete cycle of the swing takes about | 3.17 hours. Therefore, to increase your speed by 3.07 km/s | (the orbital speed at geostationary orbit), you would need to | pump the swing for half a cycle, or about 1.59 hours. | | However, this is a very optimistic estimate, because it | ignores several factors that would make it harder to pump the | swing, such as air resistance, friction, and the fact that | you cannot apply a constant force throughout the swing. In | reality, you would need much more time and energy to pump the | swing to such a high speed. | bhaney wrote: | > 32.63 million meters [...] is more than five times longer | than the diameter of the Earth (12.74 million meters) | | These walls of generated bullshit should just be considered | spam at this point. | amluto wrote: | Even ignoring the egregiously nonsensical numbers: | | > The reason is that the gravitational force of the Earth | decreases with distance, so as you go higher, the force | pulling you back becomes weaker. This means that your | potential energy increases as you go higher. | | Saying "this means that" does not make it in any respect | correct. | brianpan wrote: | Not yet! | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_50TM3OeEw | vvpan wrote: | [flagged] | micw wrote: | Empirical determined short answer: way too far. I tried this | years ago when I was with my kids on a playground and broke me a | toe that way. | avar wrote: | The proposed Olympic sport seems like an elaborate reinvention of | the standing long jump [1], just executed at an angle, and | standing on a moving, unstable and elevated platform. | | Clearly the author expects (and the interesting mathematical | problem is) that the athletes would restrict themselves to the | swing itself to gain momentum. | | But nothing about the proposed rules prevents one from standing | on the swing, and jumping forward at an angle on the backwards | swing. | | 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_long_jump | amluto wrote: | > But nothing about the proposed rules prevents one from | standing on the swing, and jumping forward at an angle on the | backwards swing. | | That doesn't sound like a very good strategy. The athlete is | likely much heavier than the swing, and applying a backwards | force to the swing will mostly just push the swing back. | | As mentioned elsewhere in the comments, one strategy is to jump | off the swing at the farthest back point (so the jumping force | is mostly balanced by the chain). Another is to jump _up_ while | the swing is moving forward. Some combination should work too. | seventytwo wrote: | Killjoy | [deleted] | dang wrote: | Recent and related: | | _How far can you jump from a swing?_ - | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37255330 - Aug 2023 (28 | comments) | | (I invited the author to repost it because while that thread got | some comments, it never made the front page, and it seemed like a | good candidate for the SCP | (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26998308).) | kirse wrote: | I had a friend in 2nd or 3rd grade who would stand on the swing | seat to use his legs to assist with gaining height and then | eventually do a backflip with the chains near parallel. | | Of course we always begged him to show off this trick every | recess. Looking back now I have no idea where he got the idea or | how he practiced his way into it, but he was always a playground | daredevil who routinely made teachers come sprinting over the | tarmac. | | I will say you knew you jumped far when that playground mulch | embedded itself in your hands and knees. | chowells wrote: | When I was a kid, lots of us learned to do a backflip off the | swing without even bothering to stand up. It isn't that hard to | just lean back at the apex, roll out of the seat, and land on | your feet. I mean... It's not that hard when you're small, | light weight, and heal quickly. | lampshades wrote: | [dead] | pak9rabid wrote: | Heh, I remember a group of us doing that as well. Also "penny | drops" off the monkey bars, where you'd hang upside-down with | your legs, swing back and forth, release and essentially do a | flip and land on your feet. God we were fearless back in the | day. | Fricken wrote: | We called those "baby drops", and flipping back off the swing | seat as it comes forward we called "cherry pickers". I'm 46 | now, I can still do both. Once you've learned them, they're | easy. | dylan604 wrote: | can and do are two different things. things heal a lot | faster when the landings are wrong in playground days than | they do at 46. i have personal experience with the healing | slower bit if not from a cherry picker move. | lampshades wrote: | [dead] ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2023-08-29 23:00 UTC)