Proving rotational motion using Newton's laws

In summary, the conversation is about a two particle system joined by a spring and subjected to a perpendicular force. The problem is to prove that the trajectory of the particles, as viewed from the center of mass, is a circle and to find the angular velocity or acceleration. The conversation also discusses whether the problem can be solved without using torque or angular momentum equations. The participants also question the initial velocities of the particles and the role of a rigid rod in the system.
  • #1
metalrose
113
0
I have asked this question before, but couldn't get a satisfactory response.
Let me make the problem more concise.

We have a two particle system, i.e. two masses of mass m each joined together by a spring of spring constant k.
A force F is applied to one of these particles in a direction perpendicular to that of the spring joining the two masses.
As the spring constant tends to infinity, the system behaves as two masses joined by a rigid rod.

Prove, (without using the kinematic approches of torque, ang. momentum et al) that the trajectory followed by the two masses, as viewed from the C.O.M. frame would be a circle centered at the C.O.M. and find out the angular velocity or acc.

You can not use the usual approches of finding the torque.
Prove the trajectory using anything but the torque or ang. momentum eq.'s

Even if you don't solve this here, please atleast tell me wether it is solvable or not. And if it is, what topics are needed as a prerequisite?
Can lagrangian mechanics solve my above problem? or theories which deal with elasticity?
And if they can, please give me some references so that I can look up.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You should be able to sketch a "proof" as seen from the CM using the fact that the initial velocity of the masses are perpendicular to the rod which means that the velocity vector will only turn (and not increase or decrease in magnitude) and the speed is thus conserved. I guess will need to identify some invariant related to the geometric relationship between the two masses (the distance constraint imposed by the rod) in order conclude the rod forces are always perpendicular to the velocity of the masses and that they therefore are bound to a constant rotation around the CM.
 
  • #3
@Filip larsen

Yes, the initial velocity vector of both the particles is perpendicular to the rod, "but in the same direction". And even if the rigid rod were to provide them with a centripetal force so as to rotate them, since they have an initial velocity in the same direction and centripetal forces in the opposite directions, one particle would have a tendency to rotate clockwise, while the other, anticlockwise.

And this ofcourse can't be true, because in the rotational motion we observe, both particles eitehr move clockwise or anticlockwise.
There lies the problem.
Hope you can help.

Thanks
 
  • #4
metalrose said:
Yes, the initial velocity vector of both the particles is perpendicular to the rod, "but in the same direction".
No, as seen from the CM the two masses have opposite velocities.

To see this you can look at it from a frame that is at rest with the masses just before the impulsive force is applied. Right after the impulsive force has been applied the first mass moves perpendicular to the rod but the second mass is at rest since none of the impulsive force can be translated to the second mass. If the rod was missing then the first mass would continue to move in its initial direction and the second mass would continue to stay at rest. The CM of the two masses (without the rod) would therefore travel with half the velocity of the first mass, which means, that seen from the CM the first mass moves one way while the other moves the opposite way. Now "insert" the rod again and note that at the CM the rod forces cancels each other, so the CM will continue to move with this initial "half" velocity even with the rod present.

From here you should be able to continue the argument with perpendicular forces on the masses.
 
  • #5
@filip larsen

I guess this won't be the case.
If we have a rigid rod, the force applied on anyone of the particles will get evenly distributed all throughout the rod and upto the other particle and this is how the entire system will achive a common acc. in the forward direction given by a=F/2m. So the initial acc. of both the particles is the same, and so both should have the same initial velocity.

Did I go wrong somewhere?
 
  • #6
metalrose said:
I have asked this question before, but couldn't get a satisfactory response.
You have gotten satisfactory response to this.
Period.
 
  • #7
metalrose said:
If we have a rigid rod, the force applied on anyone of the particles will get evenly distributed all throughout the rod and upto the other particle and this is how the entire system will achive a common acc. in the forward direction given by a=F/2m. So the initial acc. of both the particles is the same, and so both should have the same initial velocity.

This is not so. The (idealized one-dimensional) rod is only capable of transferring forces along the direction of the rod so there is no way a perpendicular impulsive force on one mass can yield a perpendicular force on the other mass at the same time. You can replace the rod with a thin strong thread that is incapable of transferring anything but "pull-forces" and still get the same motional behavior as in the original setup.
 

1. How do Newton's laws apply to rotational motion?

Newton's laws of motion can be applied to rotational motion by considering the motion of individual particles within a rotating object. The first law states that an object will remain in a state of uniform rotational motion unless acted upon by an external torque. The second law states that the net torque on an object is equal to its moment of inertia multiplied by its angular acceleration. The third law states that for every torque applied to an object, there is an equal and opposite torque exerted by the object.

2. What is the moment of inertia and how is it related to rotational motion?

The moment of inertia is a measure of an object's resistance to rotational motion. It is defined as the sum of the masses of all the particles in the object, each multiplied by the square of its distance from the axis of rotation. In rotational motion, the moment of inertia determines how much torque is needed to produce a given angular acceleration.

3. Can rotational motion be described using only Newton's laws?

Yes, rotational motion can be accurately described using only Newton's laws. However, in certain cases, other principles such as conservation of energy and angular momentum may also need to be considered for a complete understanding of the motion.

4. How can we experimentally prove that Newton's laws apply to rotational motion?

One way to experimentally prove that Newton's laws apply to rotational motion is by conducting a torque experiment. This involves attaching a known mass to a rotating object and measuring the resulting angular acceleration. By varying the mass and distance from the axis of rotation, we can verify the relationship between torque, moment of inertia, and angular acceleration as described by Newton's second law.

5. Are there any real-world applications of proving rotational motion using Newton's laws?

Yes, there are many real-world applications of proving rotational motion using Newton's laws. For example, engineers use these principles to design and optimize the performance of rotating machines, such as engines, turbines, and motors. By understanding the relationship between torque, moment of inertia, and angular acceleration, they can ensure that these machines operate efficiently and safely.

Similar threads

Replies
23
Views
3K
Replies
35
Views
3K
  • Mechanics
Replies
7
Views
932
Replies
14
Views
1K
Replies
117
Views
6K
Replies
38
Views
3K
Replies
69
Views
4K
Back
Top