On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 1:59 AM, Ian Kelly <ian.g.ke...@gmail.com> wrote: > Given that, I have to question your figures: > >> 177.211111333333 > >> compared to 177.26527800000002 calculated the rough way. That's not bad, >> only about 5cm off! Effectively, your rough calculation was accurate to >> one decimal place. > > As I noted the rough way should be an underestimate, so I'm not sure > why it's an overestimate here. That said, I don't see where either of > us made a mistake.
And I realize now that this is also because the linear deceleration assumption doesn't match the average deceleration stated in the problem. It actually decelerates faster and cuts under the t=1s and t=2s points in the velocity graph, and therefore is actually a slightly larger underestimate. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
