- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Physics Question re Good/ICE Incident
Posted on 1/14/26 at 4:32 pm to onmymedicalgrind
Posted on 1/14/26 at 4:32 pm to onmymedicalgrind
quote:Impact force depends on velocity change during contact, not on whether the object was accelerating or decelerating beforehand. If the contact velocity and collision duration are the same, the forces are the same.
Incorrect. Do you think a. body that has decelerated just prior to contact exerts the same force as a body that accelerated to that same velocity? The answer is mathematically “no.”
1
Posted on 1/14/26 at 4:33 pm to TBoy
Low Stupidity she spun her tires. If not for that she gets him clean
Understand?
Understand?
Posted on 1/14/26 at 4:39 pm to CAD703X
quote:
100% aggiehank
I made a help board thread for him. Go check it out
Posted on 1/14/26 at 4:41 pm to LSUtoBOOT
quote:Einstein did the relativity thing. Newton was the apple dropping on his noodle.
Violated Newton’s fourth law of relativity, frick around and find out.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 4:44 pm to Diamondawg
quote:Either way, it was just a FAFO joke. I laughed.quote:Einstein did the relativity thing. Newton was the apple dropping on his noodle.
Violated Newton’s fourth law of relativity, frick around and find out.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 4:48 pm to Fanatics
quote:
3197.83 N or 707 ibf is what I got, more than enough to cause serious bodily harm or death.
The biggest factor is the weight of the car. At almost 5000 lbs, it can do a lot of damage even at a low speed over a short distance. It’s no different than dropping a 50 lb dumbbell on your foot vs a 1 lb dumbbell. One impacts the foot with enough force to break bones, the other one doesn’t.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 4:48 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
Two ways to look at this.
The force of the car on the man is equal to the force of the man on the car. So when the car is accelerating, the mass of car times its acceleration is equal to the net force acting on the car to accelerate it. It has nothing to do with the force of impact.
So let’s look at impact.
First, it’s an inelastic collision. Momentum is conserved.
The man’s initial momentum is zero, assuming he’s standing still. When he’s hit, his momentum changes. The change in momentum is equal to the impulse imparted on the man, which is the product of the net force applied to the man times the time interval the car is in contact with the man. The acceleration of the man is then determined by that net force divided by the man’s mass.
So assuming you’re reading this, it doesn’t matter. The woman disobeyed a legitimate law enforcement order, and accelerated, and hit the officer, who used deadly force to protect himself, and others, from bodily harm or death.
Is it a tragedy? Yes. But he acted properly. She didn’t.
The force of the car on the man is equal to the force of the man on the car. So when the car is accelerating, the mass of car times its acceleration is equal to the net force acting on the car to accelerate it. It has nothing to do with the force of impact.
So let’s look at impact.
First, it’s an inelastic collision. Momentum is conserved.
The man’s initial momentum is zero, assuming he’s standing still. When he’s hit, his momentum changes. The change in momentum is equal to the impulse imparted on the man, which is the product of the net force applied to the man times the time interval the car is in contact with the man. The acceleration of the man is then determined by that net force divided by the man’s mass.
So assuming you’re reading this, it doesn’t matter. The woman disobeyed a legitimate law enforcement order, and accelerated, and hit the officer, who used deadly force to protect himself, and others, from bodily harm or death.
Is it a tragedy? Yes. But he acted properly. She didn’t.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 4:50 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
"acceleration" rather than "velocity."
velocity is all that matters in this case.
yes, it was more of a glancing blow than a direct impact, so standard velocity=mass do not apply.
BUT = none of that is important in the aftermath of this case.
The officer has less than a half-second to decide how to avoid death or major injury = nothing matters wrt what the driver 'intended' - zilch - zero.
Even if she had missed him and only hit a fluttering shirttail - he would have STILL been correct in trying to 'stop the threat'
EVERYTHING that happened was the direct result of INTENDED democrat policy. If they pray at all, they are praying for another "George Ffloyd" moment. They DO NOT CARE about the idiots who go out and do their bidding.
I've equated the situation to a person walking up to an officer in the process of arresting a fugitive, and that person points a gun at the officer. - they officer has every right to shoot him dead on the spot and it doesn't matter if the newly deceased had a blank gun - or even a toy gun.
ALL that matters is the officer's interpretation of the threat in the first fractional moment of the encounter.
IF you don't want to FO - don't FA.
But to flesh out the original question, I'll repeat my understanding of the threat envisioned by the officer at the instant it began.
The last impression the officer had wrt the direction of the wheels was that they were pointed at him. So ANY rapid motion of the car - to him - represented a serious threat to run into him. The fact that as she accelerated, she turned the wheels to her right is not relevant - the officer had no way to see that - and in fact even that turn did not prevent the car from impacting him.
SO - the VALID impression the officer had of the result of the car beginning to accelerate would be that it would hit him head on and actually run completely over him.
It all boils down to democrats starting a dangerous game, and intentionally provoking the officers who are merely doing their jobs. With a lot more restraint that I would be able to manage.
But - the democrats want more injuries and death. they are just that evil.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 4:52 pm to Deplorableinohio
Thanks.
This is all probably pretty meaningless, but 99% of what gets posted here is pretty meaningless.
And I was curious.
This is all probably pretty meaningless, but 99% of what gets posted here is pretty meaningless.
And I was curious.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 4:54 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
You’re missing the impact area square to the force vector upon which the angle of occurrence delineates.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 4:55 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
Maybe varying types of tackles in football might help your analysis.
There are more variables in your equation that you are ignoring.
There are glancing blows of course.
I have seen direct hits that send people flying.
With objects that are not firmly planted on the ground, resistance is reduced like standing on an icy patch.
In some instances forces of impact or explosion or collapses have areas or small spaces that are unaffected because opposing forces cancel each other out.
The agent was struck and that is a certainty.
I’m sorry from your perspective that he was not more injured or killed to satisfy your science or leftist beliefs.
After Good’s behavior leading up to the event and the actions by her wife and the subsequent striking of the agent with the vehicle, it was possible that if no shots were fired—she makes her way down the street striking a civilian pedestrian or another vehicle killing someone.
There are more variables in your equation that you are ignoring.
There are glancing blows of course.
I have seen direct hits that send people flying.
With objects that are not firmly planted on the ground, resistance is reduced like standing on an icy patch.
In some instances forces of impact or explosion or collapses have areas or small spaces that are unaffected because opposing forces cancel each other out.
The agent was struck and that is a certainty.
I’m sorry from your perspective that he was not more injured or killed to satisfy your science or leftist beliefs.
After Good’s behavior leading up to the event and the actions by her wife and the subsequent striking of the agent with the vehicle, it was possible that if no shots were fired—she makes her way down the street striking a civilian pedestrian or another vehicle killing someone.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 4:56 pm to TFH
quote:That goes FAR beyond my 40-year-old recollection of a couple of basic physics courses, assuming that any of that has meaning and is not pure gibberish. LoL
You’re missing the impact area square to the force vector upon which the angle of occurrence delineates.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 5:00 pm to Jbird
quote:
Amazing same dick dance and chase irrelevant questions to suggest the real facts are in question.
It's why you start a hypothetical and try to slowly work it into a fact.
This BS has been going on since this incident took place.
These leftwing tards just can't take the loss and move on like well adjusted functioning humans.
It's something to behold.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 5:02 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
But why is "acceleration" the issue, rather than "velocity?"
Both acceleration and velocity were impacted by ice on the road I’d be willing to bet. And no, I don’t mean the agents, I mean the frozen precipitation. She might well have run over him on a dry surface.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 5:05 pm to AllbyMyRelf
quote:
Impact force depends on velocity change during contact, not on whether the object was accelerating or decelerating beforehand. If the contact velocity and collision duration are the same, the forces are the same.
I will admit I’ve been long away from classical physics, but I am having a hard time wrapping my mind around acceleration not having any impact (no pun intended) on force in this scenario. Is there an “impact force” equation? Otherwise, it seems like you are mixing up force with energy (I reserve the right to admit I’m wrong here
)Posted on 1/14/26 at 5:05 pm to BigTigerJoe
quote:What a silly thing to say.
I’m sorry from your perspective that he was not more injured or killed to satisfy your science or leftist beliefs.
I have repeatedly said some fairly nasty things about protesters who block streets. Ms. Good would NOT have my sympathy, if she had been arrested, etcetera. Since she died, I suppose that I feel a little bad that she died.
None of that goes to the animus directed at me regarding this incident.
As Barry and I have discussed, the issue here is simply one of whether the agent had a reasonable belief that his use of deadly force was absolutely necessary to protect life or limb (to simplify slightly). That analysis is COMPLETELY independent of any thoughts about Ms. Good.
The consensus here is a near-unanimous "yes," and a certainty that it is not even a "close call." I have the audacity to question that consensus. Frankly, I think that the consensus arises more from the identities of the players than from an objective analysis of the known facts.
In any case, this place does not react well when someone questions the groupthink.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 5:06 pm to Pitt Road
They are fully supportive of the AOC clown show that she was murdered!
Posted on 1/14/26 at 5:07 pm to NineLineBind
quote:Possible. Maybe even "likely," because Good's vehicle would have been moving forward sooner, while the agent was still more in the front-center of the hood area.
She might well have run over him on a dry surface.
In that case, the agent's use or deadly force would be more-clearly justified, too.
This post was edited on 1/14/26 at 5:11 pm
Posted on 1/14/26 at 5:09 pm to onmymedicalgrind
quote:You are younger than I, and your physics classes are doubtless much more recent.
I will admit I’ve been long away from classical physics, but I am having a hard time wrapping my mind around acceleration not having any impact (no pun intended) on force in this scenario. Is there an “impact force” equation? Otherwise, it seems like you are mixing up force with energy (I reserve the right to admit I’m wrong here )
I don't know about you, but my introductory physics classes were much more about memorizing formulas than about understanding the practical implications of those formulas.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 5:09 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
No shite.
Page 3 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News