How to get an equation from a “ball is thrown” word problem?
"A ball is thrown upward from the roof of a building 60m tall. The ball reaches a height of 80m above the ground after 2 s and hits the ground 6 s after being thrown." How do I determine the equation without using physics(constants related to physics) ideas?
It should be in the form y= ax^2+ bx + c, right? I got 60 for the y-intercept so y= ax^2+ bx + 60 The ball had the height of 80 meters at 2 seconds. It dropped to the ground in 4 seconds. So 80/4=b b=20? I found a and got -5x^2 + 20x + 60 but do my steps show I understand the problem?
functions word-problem
asked Oct 1 '16 at 2:44
Hamze
195
|
show 3 more comments
"A ball is thrown upward from the roof of a building 60m tall. The ball reaches a height of 80m above the ground after 2 s and hits the ground 6 s after being thrown." How do I determine the equation without using physics(constants related to physics) ideas?
It should be in the form y= ax^2+ bx + c, right? I got 60 for the y-intercept so y= ax^2+ bx + 60 The ball had the height of 80 meters at 2 seconds. It dropped to the ground in 4 seconds. So 80/4=b b=20? I found a and got -5x^2 + 20x + 60 but do my steps show I understand the problem?
functions word-problem
asked Oct 1 '16 at 2:44
Hamze
195
1
How can one answer a physics question without using physics? And what is the question?
– Mark Viola
Oct 1 '16 at 2:47
@Dr.MV: when there is too much information supplied, so there is enough to measure $g$. We still need the assumption that $g$ is constant.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 2:53
Please define your variables and show more steps. You appear to start with $x$ for time in seconds, but at the end $t$ appears. How did you get to $80/4=b?$ There is also a typo of $6$ for $60$ in the $y$ intercept. I suspect you understand the problem and $a$ is not the canonical $9.81$, but you haven't shown enough steps to show you understand it.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 2:57
@RossMillikan Ross, what is the question that the OP is trying to answer? And how does one answer a physics question without physics? That is, what defined the trajectory (path) of the object.
– Mark Viola
Oct 1 '16 at 2:59
@Dr.MV: once you accept the trajectory is quadratic, which to my mind is certainly physics, you can evaluate $a$ and $b$ from the data given. You don't have to accept that $a=-9.81$. I find a different value for $a$
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:08
|
show 3 more comments
"A ball is thrown upward from the roof of a building 60m tall. The ball reaches a height of 80m above the ground after 2 s and hits the ground 6 s after being thrown." How do I determine the equation without using physics(constants related to physics) ideas?
It should be in the form y= ax^2+ bx + c, right? I got 60 for the y-intercept so y= ax^2+ bx + 60 The ball had the height of 80 meters at 2 seconds. It dropped to the ground in 4 seconds. So 80/4=b b=20? I found a and got -5x^2 + 20x + 60 but do my steps show I understand the problem?
functions word-problem
asked Oct 1 '16 at 2:44
Hamze
195
"A ball is thrown upward from the roof of a building 60m tall. The ball reaches a height of 80m above the ground after 2 s and hits the ground 6 s after being thrown." How do I determine the equation without using physics(constants related to physics) ideas?
It should be in the form y= ax^2+ bx + c, right? I got 60 for the y-intercept so y= ax^2+ bx + 60 The ball had the height of 80 meters at 2 seconds. It dropped to the ground in 4 seconds. So 80/4=b b=20? I found a and got -5x^2 + 20x + 60 but do my steps show I understand the problem?
functions word-problem
functions word-problem
asked Oct 1 '16 at 2:44
Hamze
195
asked Oct 1 '16 at 2:44
Hamze
195
edited Oct 1 '16 at 3:16
asked Oct 1 '16 at 2:44
Hamze
195
asked Oct 1 '16 at 2:44
Hamze
195
asked Oct 1 '16 at 2:44
Hamze
195
195
1
How can one answer a physics question without using physics? And what is the question?
– Mark Viola
Oct 1 '16 at 2:47
@Dr.MV: when there is too much information supplied, so there is enough to measure $g$. We still need the assumption that $g$ is constant.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 2:53
Please define your variables and show more steps. You appear to start with $x$ for time in seconds, but at the end $t$ appears. How did you get to $80/4=b?$ There is also a typo of $6$ for $60$ in the $y$ intercept. I suspect you understand the problem and $a$ is not the canonical $9.81$, but you haven't shown enough steps to show you understand it.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 2:57
@RossMillikan Ross, what is the question that the OP is trying to answer? And how does one answer a physics question without physics? That is, what defined the trajectory (path) of the object.
– Mark Viola
Oct 1 '16 at 2:59
@Dr.MV: once you accept the trajectory is quadratic, which to my mind is certainly physics, you can evaluate $a$ and $b$ from the data given. You don't have to accept that $a=-9.81$. I find a different value for $a$
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:08
|
show 3 more comments
1
How can one answer a physics question without using physics? And what is the question?
– Mark Viola
Oct 1 '16 at 2:47
@Dr.MV: when there is too much information supplied, so there is enough to measure $g$. We still need the assumption that $g$ is constant.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 2:53
Please define your variables and show more steps. You appear to start with $x$ for time in seconds, but at the end $t$ appears. How did you get to $80/4=b?$ There is also a typo of $6$ for $60$ in the $y$ intercept. I suspect you understand the problem and $a$ is not the canonical $9.81$, but you haven't shown enough steps to show you understand it.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 2:57
@RossMillikan Ross, what is the question that the OP is trying to answer? And how does one answer a physics question without physics? That is, what defined the trajectory (path) of the object.
– Mark Viola
Oct 1 '16 at 2:59
@Dr.MV: once you accept the trajectory is quadratic, which to my mind is certainly physics, you can evaluate $a$ and $b$ from the data given. You don't have to accept that $a=-9.81$. I find a different value for $a$
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:08
1
1
How can one answer a physics question without using physics? And what is the question?
– Mark Viola
Oct 1 '16 at 2:47
How can one answer a physics question without using physics? And what is the question?
– Mark Viola
Oct 1 '16 at 2:47
@Dr.MV: when there is too much information supplied, so there is enough to measure $g$. We still need the assumption that $g$ is constant.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 2:53
@Dr.MV: when there is too much information supplied, so there is enough to measure $g$. We still need the assumption that $g$ is constant.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 2:53
Please define your variables and show more steps. You appear to start with $x$ for time in seconds, but at the end $t$ appears. How did you get to $80/4=b?$ There is also a typo of $6$ for $60$ in the $y$ intercept. I suspect you understand the problem and $a$ is not the canonical $9.81$, but you haven't shown enough steps to show you understand it.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 2:57
Please define your variables and show more steps. You appear to start with $x$ for time in seconds, but at the end $t$ appears. How did you get to $80/4=b?$ There is also a typo of $6$ for $60$ in the $y$ intercept. I suspect you understand the problem and $a$ is not the canonical $9.81$, but you haven't shown enough steps to show you understand it.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 2:57
@RossMillikan Ross, what is the question that the OP is trying to answer? And how does one answer a physics question without physics? That is, what defined the trajectory (path) of the object.
– Mark Viola
Oct 1 '16 at 2:59
@RossMillikan Ross, what is the question that the OP is trying to answer? And how does one answer a physics question without physics? That is, what defined the trajectory (path) of the object.
– Mark Viola
Oct 1 '16 at 2:59
@Dr.MV: once you accept the trajectory is quadratic, which to my mind is certainly physics, you can evaluate $a$ and $b$ from the data given. You don't have to accept that $a=-9.81$. I find a different value for $a$
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:08
@Dr.MV: once you accept the trajectory is quadratic, which to my mind is certainly physics, you can evaluate $a$ and $b$ from the data given. You don't have to accept that $a=-9.81$. I find a different value for $a$
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:08
|
show 3 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Physics says two things. First, that the acceleration from gravity is constant, and second, that the acceleration is $-9.81 m/s^2$. You have accepted the first, which results in $y=ax^2+bx+c$ (assuming $x$ is time) but rejected the second. That is fine, you have enough data to evaluate all the constants, as you have three points on the parabola and need three constants, $a,b,c$. As you say, $c=60$ is immediate.
answered Oct 1 '16 at 3:17
Ross Millikan
292k23197371
1
We know the equation is y=ax^2+ bx +60. I'd put in the point (2,80) to get 80=a(2)^2 + b(2) +60. Put in the point (6,0) to get 0=a(6)^2 + b(6) +60. Now I have 2 equations with 2 unknowns. I used all 3 points to find all 3 constants by solving for a, and then b. Does this work?
– Hamze
Oct 1 '16 at 3:23
Yes, that works fine. It turns out $b=20$, but your logic in the question does not justify that.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:30
I don't understand why my method works, actually. Did I find the point of intersection? Could I have used any other 2 points?
– Hamze
Oct 1 '16 at 3:35
You were lucky. It turns out $(2,80)$ is the peak, but that is not given. You can write it as $y=-5(x-2)^2+80$. If the ground were at the launch altitude the equation would be $y=-5(x-2)^2$ and it would have hit the ground at $4$ seconds. You would have found $b=20/2=10$ because the peak was $20$ and it hit the ground $2$ seconds later.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:49
1
You have three points on the parabola, if you add in $(0,60)$. That gives you three equations in the three unknowns $a,b,c$ You are just solving the three simultaneous equations to find them. As you noted in the question, the fact that you have a value at $x=0$ makes finding $c$ immediate.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 4:03
|
show 1 more comment
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1948808%2fhow-to-get-an-equation-from-a-ball-is-thrown-word-problem%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Physics says two things. First, that the acceleration from gravity is constant, and second, that the acceleration is $-9.81 m/s^2$. You have accepted the first, which results in $y=ax^2+bx+c$ (assuming $x$ is time) but rejected the second. That is fine, you have enough data to evaluate all the constants, as you have three points on the parabola and need three constants, $a,b,c$. As you say, $c=60$ is immediate.
answered Oct 1 '16 at 3:17
Ross Millikan
292k23197371
1
We know the equation is y=ax^2+ bx +60. I'd put in the point (2,80) to get 80=a(2)^2 + b(2) +60. Put in the point (6,0) to get 0=a(6)^2 + b(6) +60. Now I have 2 equations with 2 unknowns. I used all 3 points to find all 3 constants by solving for a, and then b. Does this work?
– Hamze
Oct 1 '16 at 3:23
Yes, that works fine. It turns out $b=20$, but your logic in the question does not justify that.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:30
I don't understand why my method works, actually. Did I find the point of intersection? Could I have used any other 2 points?
– Hamze
Oct 1 '16 at 3:35
You were lucky. It turns out $(2,80)$ is the peak, but that is not given. You can write it as $y=-5(x-2)^2+80$. If the ground were at the launch altitude the equation would be $y=-5(x-2)^2$ and it would have hit the ground at $4$ seconds. You would have found $b=20/2=10$ because the peak was $20$ and it hit the ground $2$ seconds later.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:49
1
You have three points on the parabola, if you add in $(0,60)$. That gives you three equations in the three unknowns $a,b,c$ You are just solving the three simultaneous equations to find them. As you noted in the question, the fact that you have a value at $x=0$ makes finding $c$ immediate.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 4:03
|
show 1 more comment
Physics says two things. First, that the acceleration from gravity is constant, and second, that the acceleration is $-9.81 m/s^2$. You have accepted the first, which results in $y=ax^2+bx+c$ (assuming $x$ is time) but rejected the second. That is fine, you have enough data to evaluate all the constants, as you have three points on the parabola and need three constants, $a,b,c$. As you say, $c=60$ is immediate.
answered Oct 1 '16 at 3:17
Ross Millikan
292k23197371
1
We know the equation is y=ax^2+ bx +60. I'd put in the point (2,80) to get 80=a(2)^2 + b(2) +60. Put in the point (6,0) to get 0=a(6)^2 + b(6) +60. Now I have 2 equations with 2 unknowns. I used all 3 points to find all 3 constants by solving for a, and then b. Does this work?
– Hamze
Oct 1 '16 at 3:23
Yes, that works fine. It turns out $b=20$, but your logic in the question does not justify that.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:30
I don't understand why my method works, actually. Did I find the point of intersection? Could I have used any other 2 points?
– Hamze
Oct 1 '16 at 3:35
You were lucky. It turns out $(2,80)$ is the peak, but that is not given. You can write it as $y=-5(x-2)^2+80$. If the ground were at the launch altitude the equation would be $y=-5(x-2)^2$ and it would have hit the ground at $4$ seconds. You would have found $b=20/2=10$ because the peak was $20$ and it hit the ground $2$ seconds later.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:49
1
You have three points on the parabola, if you add in $(0,60)$. That gives you three equations in the three unknowns $a,b,c$ You are just solving the three simultaneous equations to find them. As you noted in the question, the fact that you have a value at $x=0$ makes finding $c$ immediate.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 4:03
|
show 1 more comment
Physics says two things. First, that the acceleration from gravity is constant, and second, that the acceleration is $-9.81 m/s^2$. You have accepted the first, which results in $y=ax^2+bx+c$ (assuming $x$ is time) but rejected the second. That is fine, you have enough data to evaluate all the constants, as you have three points on the parabola and need three constants, $a,b,c$. As you say, $c=60$ is immediate.
answered Oct 1 '16 at 3:17
Ross Millikan
292k23197371
Physics says two things. First, that the acceleration from gravity is constant, and second, that the acceleration is $-9.81 m/s^2$. You have accepted the first, which results in $y=ax^2+bx+c$ (assuming $x$ is time) but rejected the second. That is fine, you have enough data to evaluate all the constants, as you have three points on the parabola and need three constants, $a,b,c$. As you say, $c=60$ is immediate.
answered Oct 1 '16 at 3:17
Ross Millikan
292k23197371
edited Oct 1 '16 at 3:31
answered Oct 1 '16 at 3:17
Ross Millikan
292k23197371
answered Oct 1 '16 at 3:17
Ross Millikan
292k23197371
answered Oct 1 '16 at 3:17
Ross Millikan
292k23197371
292k23197371
1
We know the equation is y=ax^2+ bx +60. I'd put in the point (2,80) to get 80=a(2)^2 + b(2) +60. Put in the point (6,0) to get 0=a(6)^2 + b(6) +60. Now I have 2 equations with 2 unknowns. I used all 3 points to find all 3 constants by solving for a, and then b. Does this work?
– Hamze
Oct 1 '16 at 3:23
Yes, that works fine. It turns out $b=20$, but your logic in the question does not justify that.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:30
I don't understand why my method works, actually. Did I find the point of intersection? Could I have used any other 2 points?
– Hamze
Oct 1 '16 at 3:35
You were lucky. It turns out $(2,80)$ is the peak, but that is not given. You can write it as $y=-5(x-2)^2+80$. If the ground were at the launch altitude the equation would be $y=-5(x-2)^2$ and it would have hit the ground at $4$ seconds. You would have found $b=20/2=10$ because the peak was $20$ and it hit the ground $2$ seconds later.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:49
1
You have three points on the parabola, if you add in $(0,60)$. That gives you three equations in the three unknowns $a,b,c$ You are just solving the three simultaneous equations to find them. As you noted in the question, the fact that you have a value at $x=0$ makes finding $c$ immediate.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 4:03
|
show 1 more comment
1
We know the equation is y=ax^2+ bx +60. I'd put in the point (2,80) to get 80=a(2)^2 + b(2) +60. Put in the point (6,0) to get 0=a(6)^2 + b(6) +60. Now I have 2 equations with 2 unknowns. I used all 3 points to find all 3 constants by solving for a, and then b. Does this work?
– Hamze
Oct 1 '16 at 3:23
Yes, that works fine. It turns out $b=20$, but your logic in the question does not justify that.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:30
I don't understand why my method works, actually. Did I find the point of intersection? Could I have used any other 2 points?
– Hamze
Oct 1 '16 at 3:35
You were lucky. It turns out $(2,80)$ is the peak, but that is not given. You can write it as $y=-5(x-2)^2+80$. If the ground were at the launch altitude the equation would be $y=-5(x-2)^2$ and it would have hit the ground at $4$ seconds. You would have found $b=20/2=10$ because the peak was $20$ and it hit the ground $2$ seconds later.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:49
1
You have three points on the parabola, if you add in $(0,60)$. That gives you three equations in the three unknowns $a,b,c$ You are just solving the three simultaneous equations to find them. As you noted in the question, the fact that you have a value at $x=0$ makes finding $c$ immediate.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 4:03
1
1
We know the equation is y=ax^2+ bx +60. I'd put in the point (2,80) to get 80=a(2)^2 + b(2) +60. Put in the point (6,0) to get 0=a(6)^2 + b(6) +60. Now I have 2 equations with 2 unknowns. I used all 3 points to find all 3 constants by solving for a, and then b. Does this work?
– Hamze
Oct 1 '16 at 3:23
We know the equation is y=ax^2+ bx +60. I'd put in the point (2,80) to get 80=a(2)^2 + b(2) +60. Put in the point (6,0) to get 0=a(6)^2 + b(6) +60. Now I have 2 equations with 2 unknowns. I used all 3 points to find all 3 constants by solving for a, and then b. Does this work?
– Hamze
Oct 1 '16 at 3:23
Yes, that works fine. It turns out $b=20$, but your logic in the question does not justify that.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:30
Yes, that works fine. It turns out $b=20$, but your logic in the question does not justify that.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:30
I don't understand why my method works, actually. Did I find the point of intersection? Could I have used any other 2 points?
– Hamze
Oct 1 '16 at 3:35
I don't understand why my method works, actually. Did I find the point of intersection? Could I have used any other 2 points?
– Hamze
Oct 1 '16 at 3:35
You were lucky. It turns out $(2,80)$ is the peak, but that is not given. You can write it as $y=-5(x-2)^2+80$. If the ground were at the launch altitude the equation would be $y=-5(x-2)^2$ and it would have hit the ground at $4$ seconds. You would have found $b=20/2=10$ because the peak was $20$ and it hit the ground $2$ seconds later.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:49
You were lucky. It turns out $(2,80)$ is the peak, but that is not given. You can write it as $y=-5(x-2)^2+80$. If the ground were at the launch altitude the equation would be $y=-5(x-2)^2$ and it would have hit the ground at $4$ seconds. You would have found $b=20/2=10$ because the peak was $20$ and it hit the ground $2$ seconds later.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:49
1
1
You have three points on the parabola, if you add in $(0,60)$. That gives you three equations in the three unknowns $a,b,c$ You are just solving the three simultaneous equations to find them. As you noted in the question, the fact that you have a value at $x=0$ makes finding $c$ immediate.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 4:03
You have three points on the parabola, if you add in $(0,60)$. That gives you three equations in the three unknowns $a,b,c$ You are just solving the three simultaneous equations to find them. As you noted in the question, the fact that you have a value at $x=0$ makes finding $c$ immediate.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 4:03
|
show 1 more comment
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1948808%2fhow-to-get-an-equation-from-a-ball-is-thrown-word-problem%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
How can one answer a physics question without using physics? And what is the question?
– Mark Viola
Oct 1 '16 at 2:47
@Dr.MV: when there is too much information supplied, so there is enough to measure $g$. We still need the assumption that $g$ is constant.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 2:53
Please define your variables and show more steps. You appear to start with $x$ for time in seconds, but at the end $t$ appears. How did you get to $80/4=b?$ There is also a typo of $6$ for $60$ in the $y$ intercept. I suspect you understand the problem and $a$ is not the canonical $9.81$, but you haven't shown enough steps to show you understand it.
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 2:57
@RossMillikan Ross, what is the question that the OP is trying to answer? And how does one answer a physics question without physics? That is, what defined the trajectory (path) of the object.
– Mark Viola
Oct 1 '16 at 2:59
@Dr.MV: once you accept the trajectory is quadratic, which to my mind is certainly physics, you can evaluate $a$ and $b$ from the data given. You don't have to accept that $a=-9.81$. I find a different value for $a$
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:08