-
-
Copy & paste this:
« Previous What people say or do when they see a bad car accident | Songs on my iPod Next »
» 66 TPS Reports
Leave a Reply
-
Latest Comments
truth on They’re Not Going to Che… CaptionObvious on Art of Trolling: Nothing, Noth… Joe Mamma on Momanoia Frühstück on Han Shot First, Damn It! SwordFish on Replotted: That’s Just… SwordFish on Replotted- Pol·i·ti·cian: A Pe… SwordFish on Replotted- Pol·i·ti·cian: A Pe… SwordFish on So Many Countless Hours Spent … NotSoIrish on So Many Countless Hours Spent … E on Well, When They’re Rappi… OtakuTom on Classic: It’s a Tra… Miku on So Many Countless Hours Spent … Rageman on Han Shot First, Damn It! Mr. Wayne on So Many Countless Hours Spent … Steven on People killed this month: 
Cheezburger Company Blog
What goes up must come down…
the trampoline is a lie
and this graph is a fail
Who voted for this, honestly?
is this supposed to be funny or accurate? it doesnt seem to be either….
Attention to detail FAIL
You mean how it measures in meters? How you would get 7 meters above the ground is what I want to know…
And then you get to 0 meters. That means the person falls. Duh
Not if you’re Olympic-level and you have the right tramp.
Seriously, I saw this Japanese kid hit eight meters once. Still probably out there on YouTube.
Guise, maybe it was an American who didn’t understand ft-metres conversion. Come on now.
@RevolutionaryWar
How did this even get ON here?
It’s probably on here because it’s unique and funny compared to the other graphs. Have you seen some of the candidates? LOL
Look at what happens at 14 seconds. ( The person falls off)
Pwned :rolleyes:
Smiley fail.
Hahaha, good one.
7 meters is a pretty nasty height to fall from…
I can’t believe you don’t understand it!
Put this on failblog … v=1/2 *g*t^2 and much more equations
thank you
Perhaps that should be put on failblog, as velocity does not equal 1/2*g*t^2. Height might be closer to what you’re looking for…
… of course you can claim now that you just used v for height, but I wouldn’t believe you.
Haha took me a few seconds to get this one but it was worth it
how the f*ck do you jump 7 meters into the air?
Seven meters is only about 23 feet. Watching some Olympic trampoline footage, it appears that those guys can get to about 40 feet.
Olympic trampoline-ers (I’m coining that word) wouldn’t fall off after 14 seconds. This is supposed to be about the average person.
Kickazz! The timeline goes something like this:
boing (eh)
Boing (wow)
BOing (Yay!)
BOIng (wheee!)
BOINg (Whoppie!)
BOING (i’m flying!)
BBOOIINNNGG (supercalifragilisticexpialidocious! I can say that ag…)
CRASH! (MOMMMMMMM!)
fail
The graph line should be in a wave format and not a zig-zag format. Like a sine wave.
Math fail. The top part should be a series of parabolas. The bottom part could also be a series of parabolas, but will actually depend upon a variety of factors including the spring constants of the trampoline springs, stretchiness of the trampoline fabric, the behavior of the person upon landing, etc., many of which are probably nonlinear, complicated, and difficult to model.
Of course, all of this is assuming continuous sampling…considering the distinct linear time intervals, it would appear more likely that the graph maker used data with a sampling interval that roughly corresponded with the period of motion.
Or we’re just over-analyzing the thing. It made me laugh.
Of course we assume continous sampling! If we further assume the trampoline to be ideal (that is, the only impulse exerted upon the jumper is an ideal Dirac-impulse and the surface stays perfectly still) then the velocity will be discontinous at every bounce. Now we apply Newton’s law and see that gravity imposes a downward acceleration of 9.8 m/s^2. Therefore we’ll get a series of parabolas, just as “Yeah” wrote above.
In other news, I probably have too much free time.
You can model it pretty simply with a second order differential equation. The solution is a sine wave. I’m not sure where this talk of parabolas is coming from.
Yes you could model the trampoline as an ideal harmonic oscillator. The trapolinist doesn’t stay attached to the trampoline when jumping though. When flying up and down it’s just basic free fall equations which do give you the parabolic shape of the vertical position vs. time. a=g => v=a*t => y=1/2*a*t^2
The idea of an ideal Dirac impulse seems pretty wild. This would indicate acceleration approaching infinity on every bounce, which might feel quite nasty and isn’t physically too accurate in this case either. Not a very ideal trampoline either unless you prefer concrete.
Smartasses.
Finally!
Well, considering they made the graph via Graph Builder, I don’t think they’re too worried about parabolas (line graphs on Graph Builder appear to be incapable of creating curved lines). Plus no normal person on a trampoline could get 7 meters in the air, so…yeah.
I can.
+1 to criticizing the sine curve.
A sine wave. Interesting. You always slow down before you hit the ground?
An I agree with kg333 about the intervals. And about that it’s funny, anyway. Original and funny little details and stuff.
No, But you always slow down whenever there’s a trampoline under you, dumba$$.
Maybe the graph maker was jumping on a trampoline indoors and the ceiling was low….
7 meters is low?
Whoops! No it’s not.
But the graph maker could have been jumping on a trampoline indoors w/ low ceilings before they made this graph. I dunno.
each leap brings us closer to god
I lol’d.
I like how the mass of the planet changes over time…
Perhaps it"s bungee-trampoline. He"s tethered to the trampoline and the bungee cord provides the extra force to keep the periodicity constant.
Think of a paddle-ball game, except you"re the ball
Gah! apos vs. quot fail.
2nd, 3rd and 4th poster are FAIL
I was confused. Then I looked again. Now I get it. That’s pretty good. Yes, I think I like this one.
That’s very clever.
Shut up and laugh at it. Assholes.
yeah seriously guys
I actually lol’d at this
You’re supposed to say “hahah obvious graph is obvious”
Who can actually manage 3 meters on the first jump? Or a 13m rise/fall in two seconds?
Attention to detail fail is right. None of you are going to say it? It’s going to have to be me to break it to the morons posting that this graph isn’t funny. LOOK AT THE END. It goes farther than before, meaning he fell through the trampoline, or fell off. And who cares if it is accurate or not? Did you expect him to do a scientific study on what the average height of the first, second, third, etc. jump was? Just pay attention to detail, laugh at the joke, and scroll to the next one.
“Just pay attention to detail?” If you did that, you’d realize it was inaccurate and not even funny…
On the contrary, the fall at the end is amusing and sadly accurate
no scientific study needed. a 7th grader in math class learning about graphs can tell you its a simple parabola.
This is cute, but it absolutely should not be linear.
WTF, i’ve done better ones and i havent seen them here, the graph isnt even correct in so many levels, it isnt a straight line, you actually come to a stop while airbourne, so its a parabole.
Should have 15 second mark and a little 1/2 meter bounce between 14 & 15.
I just love how much people feel the need to point out the same mistake over and over and over and over and over and over….
I didn’t make this graph or any graph on this site but damn, people. Isn’t once or twice enough? Can’t find anything else to comment on?
It’s not just this graph either.
your right, why can’t people just look at the graph and laugh. sure there are some errors but its still funny
And funny is all that really matters, isn’t it?
This is hillarious. A beautiful and simple idea.
Wait a secint, this tramp WAS outsyde rite? Cuz all my adventures on that thing end the same way and my ceiling is only 2 metres high… oh and a famly of bunnyz live up there cuz o the hloz I made!! LOL
@ end of graph:
Ouch.