by ExCon90
A feature called Ask Marilyn in Parade magazine last Sunday contained the following statement dealing with some previous correspondence on the subject of impacts in collisions:
"In a head-on collision, the sum of the vehicles' speeds does not equal the force of the impact. This is a common misconception, sometimes propagated by news reports. Say two identical cars are traveling at 50 mph and they collide head-on. Each car sustains a 50 [-] mph impact, not a 100 [-] mph impact."
I didn't study physics, but to me this seems profoundly counter-intuitive, and in reports of head-on train collisions we often read about the combined speed at the time of collision, yet the magazine feature (which has committed other factual errors in the past) seems to be saying that the combined speed is irrelevant. Specifically, it says that "a head-on collision between a 15 [-] mph bike and a 35 [-] mph car will not deliver a 50 [-] mph impact to either party."
Yet it's the same collision. Would someone who is up to speed on physics care to comment?
"In a head-on collision, the sum of the vehicles' speeds does not equal the force of the impact. This is a common misconception, sometimes propagated by news reports. Say two identical cars are traveling at 50 mph and they collide head-on. Each car sustains a 50 [-] mph impact, not a 100 [-] mph impact."
I didn't study physics, but to me this seems profoundly counter-intuitive, and in reports of head-on train collisions we often read about the combined speed at the time of collision, yet the magazine feature (which has committed other factual errors in the past) seems to be saying that the combined speed is irrelevant. Specifically, it says that "a head-on collision between a 15 [-] mph bike and a 35 [-] mph car will not deliver a 50 [-] mph impact to either party."
Yet it's the same collision. Would someone who is up to speed on physics care to comment?