(INTERSTING)question aboutNewton law of motion

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter wonderkid
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Law Motion
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Newton's third law of motion in the context of a horse pulling a cart. Participants explore the implications of equal and opposite forces between the horse and cart, questioning how the horse can still move forward despite these forces suggesting a net force of zero between them.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how the horse can move forward if the forces between the horse and cart are equal and opposite, suggesting a net force of zero.
  • Another participant clarifies that the horse does not move forward with respect to the cart, emphasizing the role of the ground in providing the necessary force for the horse's movement.
  • It is noted that while the horse pulls the cart forward, the cart exerts an equal and opposite force on the horse, but these forces act on different bodies and do not cancel out in terms of net force on each body.
  • A participant suggests that if the horse and cart are considered as a single system, the forces between them cancel, but the external force from the ground is what allows the system to move.
  • One participant proposes using a tractor trailer example to illustrate the dynamics involved, mentioning factors like friction and air resistance that could affect movement.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of the attachment between the horse and cart, with some participants arguing that the nature of this attachment (rigid harness vs. spring) influences the relative motion.
  • Several participants express differing views on whether Newton's laws prevent the horse from moving forward with respect to the cart, with some asserting that they do not.
  • One participant suggests that a misunderstanding of Newton's third law is at the core of the original question.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the application of Newton's third law in this scenario. There is no consensus on the interpretation of the forces involved or the implications for the horse's movement relative to the cart.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight ambiguities related to the attachment between the horse and cart, the role of external forces, and the assumptions made in the discussion. The complexity of the dynamics involved, including friction and resistance, is also noted but remains unresolved.

wonderkid
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
question:

a hourse is 'bound' together with a cart to carry goods.
according to Newton's third law,when 2 bodies interact,they exert equal and opposite forces on one another.
then,if horse exerts a force to move forward,there should be an equal and opposite direction force exerted by the cart that acting on horse.
then net force between these two bodies will be zero.
BUT WHY THE HORSE STILL CAN MOVE FORWARD IF THE NET FORCE BETWEEN CART AND HORSE ARE ZERO?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
wonderkid said:
BUT WHY THE HORSE STILL CAN MOVE FORWARD IF THE NET FORCE BETWEEN CART AND HORSE ARE ZERO?
The horse does not move forward with respect to the cart, in accorance with Newton's law.
 
Notice the words "with respect to the cart" in russ watters' answer!

There is a force, forward, applied to the cart by the horse and an equal-but-opposite force applied to the horse by the cart. There is no net force and so the distance between the horse and cart does not change.

There is also a force to the earth, backward, applied by the horse to the ground. The ground applies an equal-but-opposite force, forward to the horse. Since the horse and Earth are not bound together the horse (and cart) moves forward. Theoretically, the Earth moves slightly backward but the difference in masses is so great, it is infinitesmal.
 
wonderkid said:
according to Newton's third law,when 2 bodies interact,they exert equal and opposite forces on one another.
That's correct. If the horse pulls on the cart, then the cart pulls back on the horse with an equal and opposite force. Note that these "equal and opposite" forces act on different bodies and thus cannot be added together to get a net force.
then,if horse exerts a force to move forward,there should be an equal and opposite direction force exerted by the cart that acting on horse.
I'll rephrase that: In order for the cart to start moving, the horse must exert a force on it. Right! And thus there is an equal force pulling back on the horse. If that were the only force acting on the horse, then cart and horse would just pull themselves closer to each other. But, of course, the ground also exerts a force on the horse.
then net force between these two bodies will be zero.
No! Let's look at each body separately:
-Cart: Only one force acts on the cart, so obviously the "net" force on the cart can't be zero!
-Horse: Two forces act on the horse: the cart's force pulling back, and the ground pushing forward.

If you choose to look at the "Cart + Horse" as a single system, then the forces between Cart and Horse will cancel each other, since they both act on the same system. But then the only force of interest for understanding the motion of "Cart + Horse" is the external force of ground on horse.
BUT WHY THE HORSE STILL CAN MOVE FORWARD IF THE NET FORCE BETWEEN CART AND HORSE ARE ZERO?
Because the net force on each object is not zero!
 
Wonderkid, it might be helpful for you to update the question to a tractor trailer (semi). You can see that if you weld the fifth wheel linkage so that they form a solid body, the (straight-line) dynamics of the system don't change. The reason for the update is that it's very difficult to weld a horse. They tend to start kicking when you attach the ground clamp.
Anyhow, the net force of the system is primarily the vehicle vs the Earth. You also have to contend with frictional losses through both rolling resistance and the axle bearings, and air resistance. While those might appear inconsequential on the surface, remember that in a tornado the air resistance can be more powerful than the motor.
I specified straight-line dynamics above because obviously the thing won't handle corners.
 
Russ, Halls : There is absolutely nothing in Newton's Law that prevents the horse from moving forward "with respect to the cart".
 
True up to a point, Gokul. There will be relative movement until the elastic limit of the attachment (harness etc.) is reached. If it doesn't break, then the cart has to move with the horse; if the cart is too heavy, then the horse will stop moving at that point.
That ambiguity is actually why I used the trailer example.
 
The reason why the horse does not move with respect to the cart is not because Newton's law's prevent it, but because horse and cart are assumed to be attached. But all that is beside the point of the OP's question, which has to do with understanding Newton's 3rd law.
 
  • #10
I think it may be high time that an explanation of Newtons 3rd law was added to out FAQ in general physics.
 
  • #11
Gokul43201 said:
Russ, Halls : There is absolutely nothing in Newton's Law that prevents the horse from moving forward "with respect to the cart".
?? F=ma: if f=0, a = 0?
 
  • #12
russ_watters said:
?? F=ma: if f=0, a = 0?
What if the horse and cart were attached by an ideal spring? What about two bodies that are gravitationally or electrostatically coupled? The reason that there is no relative acceleration in the OP's case is because of the rigid harness and that's it.
 
  • #13
Gokul43201 said:
What if the horse and cart were attached by an ideal spring?
The horse and cart aren't attached by an ideal spring, so it really isn't relevant: I was answering the question that was asked.
The reason that there is no relative acceleration in the OP's case is because of the rigid harness and that's it.
That is a way to look at it without using the laws of motion, but the OP was asking about the laws of motion, so I answered the question in those terms. Just saying that they are attached rigidly doesn't explain how that jives with the laws of motion. Besides, if the cart and horse are attached by a spring, you still need to apply f=ma in addition to the spring force equation to find the acceleration of each or between the two.
 
Last edited:
  • #14
Gokul43201 said:
What if the horse and cart were attached by an ideal spring?
I just bought a box of those off ebay!
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Newton's Third Law: Action & Reaction Along the Line Connecting Two Objects
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Undergrad Newton's 3rd law: motorized cart pushes a heavy cart
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
High School Newton's first law?
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
6K
High School The application of Newton's laws to fluid equilibrium
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
High School Action-reaction of a sailing boat and wind
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
High School Why Is an Object's Weight Equal to the Force of Gravity It Experiences?
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
6K
High School Confusion in Newton's 3rd law of motion
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
High School Newton's Third Law in space
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
High School Are frictional forces action forces or reaction forces?
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Undergrad Newton's Second Law - variable mass case
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K