Is torque a necessary defenition?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter TuviaDaCat
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Torque
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the necessity and understanding of torque in the context of classical mechanics, particularly whether it can be explained solely through Newton's laws without invoking the concept of torque. Participants explore the implications of torque on rotational motion and energy conservation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether torque is necessary, suggesting that the behavior of forces in rotational motion could be explained using Newton's laws alone, particularly in the context of energy conservation.
  • Another participant offers to help derive torque from first principles, emphasizing its utility in simplifying calculations related to conservation of energy.
  • Some participants express the importance of having a good textbook for understanding mechanics, indicating that learning from the internet alone may not be sufficient.
  • A participant mentions the complexity of problems involving radial symmetry and how considering torque can simplify these problems, particularly in the context of rigid body motion.
  • There is a suggestion that understanding torque may require a more organized approach to learning, as indicated by the mention of Feynman's lectures and the need for structured resources.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the necessity of torque, with some arguing for its importance in simplifying problems while others question its fundamental necessity. The discussion remains unresolved regarding whether torque can be fully explained without its own definition.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about their understanding of the topic, and there are references to the limitations of learning without structured resources. The discussion also highlights the complexity of applying Newton's laws to rotational motion without considering torque.

TuviaDaCat
Messages
85
Reaction score
1
im going mad, is torque necessary? is there no more basic explanation using Newton's laws to explain why two tangent and equal forces(which are in opposite direction along the circle) even values, with different levers would rotate in the direction of the force with the bigger level is pointing at?

i know that if the force with the smaller lever would make it rotate it would violate the conservation of energy, since if the body moved for a certain angle, then the work of the small levered force is smaller than the work of the big levered force(same forces, different lengths along the parameter), therefor the body is supposed to slow down, yet it accelerated up... which is a contradiction to the conservation of energy.

so can torque phenomenons be explained by other means?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Can you reword your questions more clearly please? I don't really understand what your asking. :confused:
 
Hint: get a good textbook and read.
 
torque is really just a useful quantity to define, as it can be frustrating to work through the math related to conservation of energy in any given torque problem, if you want I can help walk you through how to derive torque from first principles, and most importantly why its equal to the quantity F*r (for a basic definition)

first take a look at what units torque is measured in.
 
CPL.Luke said:
torque is really just a useful quantity to define, as it can be frustrating to work through the math related to conservation of energy in any given torque problem, if you want I can help walk you through how to derive torque from first principles, and most importantly why its equal to the quantity F*r (for a basic definition)

first take a look at what units torque is measured in.

cool, its good to know that moment is not something as basic as force...
and ill think ill try to develop the equations myself(those using torque), shouldn't be to hard i think...

bah, its quite hard to understand physics without having an organized book, my head is a mass even with the little i know..
 
hmm if your not using a book I'm afraid you won't be able to get very far

"the internet is a mile wide, and an inch deep"

-somebody
 
CPL.Luke said:
hmm if your not using a book I'm afraid you won't be able to get very far

"the internet is a mile wide, and an inch deep"

-somebody

very true, but in some way it forces me to think more, since it "hides" a lot of information.

i do like being fundamental when learning, though I am not buying a book on mechanics since ill have one in a year when ill do a course in the open university(the books are a part of the course's payment), so it will be a waste to buy a big set of books.
though now i just started reading feynman's lectures on physics, though it aint much fundamental i guess...
 
Tuvia, you must have books.

Mods , I'd like to lend Tuvia a couple of books on classical mechanics.
I don't know what the rules say, but you may give him my email address.

M
 
Mentz114 said:
Tuvia, you must have books.

Mods , I'd like to lend Tuvia a couple of books on classical mechanics.
I don't know what the rules say, but you may give him my email address.

M

i am very unsure if i understood you... are you talking about ebook(pdf file or something?)
 
  • #10
Since I made that post, I had a look for the books in question ( Schaum "Lagrangian Mechanics" and another called "Classical Mechanics") and I can't find them. So my offer is withdrawn, sorry. They may not have been what you need in any case.

M
 
  • #11
if you have a problem involving radial symmetry, it will be only natural to have torques. For instance, the central force problem. by going radial, you reduces one degree of freedom by noticing that net torque is zero. If you brake the radial force into x,y components, you can still solve the problem but it will be ugly and inelegant.

things become even more complicated when you study rigid body motion. How can you consider x,y components of the intermolecular forces for each individual molecules? If you go to radial symmetry, you can assume that all internal forces are central and that saves a ton of trouble.

And as Radou said, get a good textbook and you will see how the physics is simplified in some problems by considering torque.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
8K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K