Dad thinks he is right

So, I'm having an argument with my father. He says, that if you are moving forward at a given velocity and you launch a projectile in a backwards direction, that the projectile may still land infront of the initial point of release. Can someone please explain how this could happen (maintaining all accepted and general laws of physics)

If you drop the projectile with a velocity of 0 in the x direction, it will move at the same velocity as you until it hits the ground.

So, I'm having an argument with my father. He says, that if you are moving forward at a given velocity and you launch a projectile in a backwards direction, that the projectile may still land infront of the initial point of release. Can someone please explain how this could happen (maintaining all accepted and general laws of physics)

(assuming you're not travelling faster near to the speed of light)
If you're going forward faster than the projectile is going backwards then it's net velocity will always be in the forward direction.

I suggest asking this at a physics forum and in greater detail. Otherwise, you will continue to get silly answers like the ones above.

I suggest asking this at a physics forum and in greater detail. Otherwise, you will continue to get silly answers like the ones above.

What makes you think I'm not from a physics forum?

So, I'm having an argument with my father. He says, that if you are moving forward at a given velocity and you launch a projectile in a backwards direction, that the projectile may still land infront of the initial point of release. Can someone please explain how this could happen (maintaining all accepted and general laws of physics)

Is this supposed to be a round earth conundrum? If the gun fires at the right speed (~7900m/s) the projectile will fall at the same speed as the horizon falls away and hence orbits falling short (air resistance) in front of the person who fired it? If so get the hell out with your heretic riddles. THE EARTH IS FLAT!

So, I'm having an argument with my father. He says, that if you are moving forward at a given velocity and you launch a projectile in a backwards direction, that the projectile may still land infront of the initial point of release. Can someone please explain how this could happen (maintaining all accepted and general laws of physics)

If you're riding a maglev train moving at 200 mph and you turn in your chair toss a crumpled ball into the trash at 4 mph, why is it hard to believe that the crumpled ball of paper would land infront of the initial point of release?

So, I'm having an argument with my father. He says, that if you are moving forward at a given velocity and you launch a projectile in a backwards direction, that the projectile may still land infront of the initial point of release. Can someone please explain how this could happen (maintaining all accepted and general laws of physics)

First of all, why are you asking the Flat Earth Society?

Anyway, velocity is relative. Like Tom said, if you're standing on a plane moving at 500 mph and start walking towards the back at 3 mph, you're still moving forward at 497 mph.

Please define your frame of reference and state your definition of a "backwards direction". If you assume yourself as the frame of reference (and the point of release), then you're right. If you assume anything other than yourself to be the frame of reference (and the point of release is the point at which you have released the projectile), then your father is right.

tl;dr physics

The question states that you are moving, that lets you know that you are not in the frame of reference.

Your dad is right. It depends if the moving object was at rest or moving or accelerating/decelerating when the object is thrown. Usually on Earth you'll be accelerating and moving so slowly that almost any force applied to an object in throwing it will make it fall behind the initial point where it is thrown, simply because you'll need much, much less force to accelerate a ball to an equal or greater acceleration than it takes a bus to get there.

It's actually easer to think about this with a rocket in space, it deals with all the complications of air resistance and comparatively slow velocities. Imagine that I have a two stage space ship in orbit travelling at 2,000m/s. I want to jettison the first stage so I can activate the engine on the second stage. I activate the explosive bolts which, for a split second provide 1,000m/s^2 acceleration in the opposite direction to the direction of travel. The first stage feels that for 0.01 of a second, meaning that I have slowed the first stage by 10m/s. The first stage is still travelling forwards at 1,990m/s.