Tungsten electrodes for armor piercing bullets

Yes. Only reason it doesn't hurt you is because it's more spread out (area), and dampened by the mass of the firearm. You still get the same energy delivered to you (more, actually, due to air resistance to the bullet), it's just spread out over more area _and_ more time so you're not injured.

Dave Hinz

OK, today I am actually sober.

Let's not confuse energy with momentum.

Momentum is mass multiplied by speed. Energy is mass multiplied by speed squared, divided by 2. Momentum is a vector and has direction (the direction of movement), and energy is scalar, it is a single value.

Newton's law states that the action (FORCE) is equal (but in opposite direction) to opposing action (force). Note also that acceleration is proportional to force (another newton's law, a = F/m). From here, you would quickly see that any interaction between two bodies changes their momentums by the same amount, only of the opposite direction.

The law of conservation of energy is a fully different law. It means that energy cannot be created from nowhere. It keeps oil prices high. In the case of shooting guns, the energy of bullets is given to them by the burning gunpowder. Once the bullet flies out, gunpowder is spent and burned. Unless the bullet weighs exacty as much as the gun, there is no reason to expect energies of the gun and the bullet to be the same.

I think that's what is happening, yes.

OK. But that force is more spread out both in area and time for the shooter, compared to the impact of the bullet.

One of us is confused.

Well, yes, but the bullet interacts with the rifle. The force between the bullet and rifle is exactly the same as the force between the rifle and bullet, only they point in opposing directions (bullet is being pushed forward by the hot gas, and rifle is being pushed backwards).

After that, the bullet interacts with the target, and the rifle interacts with the shooter's shoulder, but these are separate interactions.

I think Dave needs to take a basic Physics course to get Energy and momentum along with force and acceleration definitions straight and maybe a little more of Newtons other laws clear. :-) ...lew...

You give no context, maybe you're talking about me? If so, pardon me for having decades between physics and today, and perhaps you could explain in English how my statements are factually inaccurate. For the record, I contend that the same amount of force will push on your shoulder, as is imparted to the bullet - but your shoulder is not injured because the force is more spread out in both area, and in time. What part of that is wrong, exactly, and why (assuming your non-attributed response was in fact to me)?

Dave Hinz

This is basically correct, if force in this context is understood as momentum.

How about "oompf"?

Momentum is equal to mass times velocity. Conservation of momentum says that the total momentum of gun + bullet is the same before and after the bullet is fired. In order for momentum to be conserved, the ratio of the speeds (absolute velocities) of the bullet and gun must be inversely proportional to their masses.

But kinetic energy is 1/2 mass x velocity squared. It's that velocity squared term that leads to the unequal division of kinetic energy between gun and bullet.

As an example, the gun weighs 100 units of mass to the bullet's 1 unit. Momentum is conserved by the gun recoiling at 1/100 the speed of the bullet.

KE of the bullet is

For the gun

Ned Simmons

LOL! That's gotta make you wonder what you were smokin' :)

So, momentum is the same thing as acceleration?

I understand this part.

Yep, I get this part.

In the case of shooting guns, the energy of bullets is given to

Yep, still with ya.

Unless the bullet weighs exacty as much as the gun,

This is where I get lost. If the acceleration of both items is proportional to their weight, why wouldn't their energy be the same? I understand that the larger item is moving slower, and the smaller one is faster. I don't understand why their ability to do a given amount of work would be different.

If I apply 1000 newtons of force to any size object to get it moving, assuming we didn't loose anything to friction, won't we need 1000 newtons to make it stop? Doesn't that mean they have the same energy?

No, it is not the same thing. Acceleration is tha rate of change of speed of movement. Momentum is mas multiplied by speed of movement.

Acceleration (speed increase) is inversely proportional to the weight.

Energy is mass by speed squared. If one object's mass is 10 times the mass of another object, that another (lighter) object would fly 10 times faster than the heavy object. The energy of the lighter object would be a result of 10 times greater speed, squared (100 times), divided by the difference of mass, 10, so it would be 100/10 = 10 times greater than the energy of heavy object.

No.

For example, you can accelerate a sledgehammer using, say, 100 newtons of force. That would accelerate it relatively slowly.

Then the sledgehammer would hit concrete, stopping very quickly. That could easily produce, say, 10,000 newtons of force, although acting for much shorter time than it took you to accelerate the sledgehammer.

The time multiplied by force value, though, would be identical for you accelerating the sledgehammer as well as for concrete stopping it. In the above example, it would take concrete 100x less time to stop the sledgehammer compared to the time it took you to accelerate it.

On Wed, 2 Nov 2005 23:32:07 -0500, with neither quill nor qualm, Ned Simmons quickly quoth:

IOW, if one thinks a rifle recoil is forceful (spread out over a larger area of your chest and shoulder) imagine the force on that tiny point of skin as a bullet hits you.

Ouch! That HAS to hurt.

- Don't be a possum on the Information Superhighway of life. ----

If properly placed, it only hurts for an instant :)

Unless that porky is eating the siding off your house. Which they do indeed do on occasion.

There is nothing wrong with hunting. ETHICAL hunting. Butchery for butchery's sake is wrong. Unfortunately there are a very small number of knuckleheads who give the rest of us a bad name.

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire. Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us) off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the shit out of you for torturing the cat." Gunner

Trust me..it does. However..seldom is the velocity of the bullet shed instantly. Even in a soft medium, it tends to slow down gradually,(relatively speaking) in in a hard medium, much of the kenetic energy is disappated via heat, and the disintergration of the bullet.

Even in soft skin targets, Ive noticed steam rising. Red mist a ground squirrel with a 22-250, and you may notice some of the released heat rising as steam.

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire. Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us) off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the shit out of you for torturing the cat." Gunner

I like to use the analogy of the vault door.

With one finger pushing firmly, you can close a several thousand pound vault door over a couple minutes.

Swing a 16lb sledge at the same door..and you may move it a few inches, and have the sledge rebound nearly out of your hands.

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire. Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us) off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the shit out of you for torturing the cat." Gunner

Let the record show that Gunner wrote back on Thu, 03 Nov 2005 17:18:07 GMT in rec.crafts.metalworking :

Is that "steam" or just the rising 'warm air' heated by the exposed internal parts of the squirrel; where his former body core (and higher temps) are now exposed to the air and cooling?

Could be either way and a bit of both, would depend on conditions, etc...

I don't have a problem with those that hunt, particularly if they consume the game. I know two families of men that hunt as a way of life. They're damned serious about it----and have hunted pretty much anything that is legal here in the States. Mountain goats, bison, etc.., as the luck of the draw dictates. These people have eaten anything they've shot, including ducks.

My comment is about me, and the lack of pleasure I derived from my one and only successful deer hunt. I drew out on a doe permit and got a clean head shot. The critter dropped in its tracks and had no idea it was shot, but I didn't feel very good about having shot it.

On the other hand, if some good hearted soul that has been successful in the hunt and enjoys sharing the kill, I can't think of anything more enjoyable than a nice pot of stifatho, a Greek stew made of venison and whole small onions in tomato sauce and spices. Oh, yeah, with a loaf of french bread!

Harold