Weight at North Pole and on the Equator

In summary, the authors used centripetal force because they were looking at the problem from an inertial frame, where there is no centrifugal force. In this frame, a person standing on the equator is accelerating due to uniform circular motion, and the net force must point towards the center of the Earth. This means that the upward force exerted by the scale will be less than the downward gravitational force, resulting in a lower scale reading.
  • #1
MathewsMD
433
7

Homework Statement



You stand on a spring scale at the norh pole and again at the equator. Which scale reading will be lower, and by what percent will it be lower than the higher reading? Assume g has the same value at pole and equator.

I have no need for the answer to this question but am looking for an explanation, rather.
In the solution, the centripetal force due to the Earth's rotation is pointed outwards (opposite to gravity) and I was wondering why this is? Why not add the centripetal force to the force of gravity instead of subtracting it, and find the weight the scale reads this way?

Here is a diagram:

http://imgur.com/wz5kuTf

So any explanation on why the force of the Earth's rotation is outwards in this case as opposed to towards the centre of the Earth would be great.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hi MathewsMD! :smile:
MathewsMD said:
In the solution, the centripetal force due to the Earth's rotation is pointed outwards (opposite to gravity) and I was wondering why this is?

That isn't centripetal force, it's centrifugal force.

In a rotating frame of reference, there is a centrifugal force (which of course has to be added to all the other forces).
 
  • #3
Do a free body diagram on the body at the equator. Let F be the outward force of the scale, and mg the inward force of the scale. What is the net outward force? If the body is rotating around the Earth's axis, is the acceleration inward or outward. Write a Newton's 2nd law force balance for the body.

Chet
 
  • #4
Here's the actual solution if you're interested.

http://imgur.com/dBBZ6qt

I understand it's the centrifugal force since it is directed radially outward, but they used centripetal in the solution which added to my confusion with this question. I just don't understand why the scale reading (FN) doesn't equal FN= mv2cosθ/r + mg.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
MathewsMD said:
Here's the actual solution if you're interested.

http://imgur.com/dBBZ6qt

I understand it's the centrifugal force since it is directed radially outward, but they used centripetal in the solution which added to my confusion with this question. I just don't understand why the scale reading (FN) doesn't equal FN= mv2cosθ/r + mg.

The force FN is outward (in the + r direction).
The force mg in inward (in the negative r direction)
The net outward force is FN-mg
The acceleration v2/r is in the negative radial direction, as is the mass times the acceleration. So, from Newton's 2nd law,

[tex]F_N-mg=-m\frac{v^2}{r}[/tex]

Forget about using the specific words centrifugal and centripetal; they are just a source of confusion. Just focus on the acceleration and its direction.
 
  • #6
You should try to get away from the notion of a centripetal force and think instead of centripetal acceleration. A centripetal force isn't another force that acts on a body. It's what we may call the resultant force if it happens to point toward the center of the circular path an object follows.

An object moving in a circle of radius r at constant speed v has a centripetal acceleration of magnitude ##a_c = v^2/R##. That's the acceleration that goes into ##\sum F = ma##. Follow Chet's suggestion and write down what the net force on a person at the equator would be. Keep in mind the only two forces acting on the person are gravity and the scale pushing up on the person's feet.

EDIT: Forgot to mention earlier that the solutions are just blatantly wrong when it says that the centripetal acceleration "points directly opposite to gravity." They point in the same direction.
 
Last edited:
  • #7
MathewsMD said:
Here's the actual solution if you're interested.

http://imgur.com/dBBZ6qt

I understand it's the centrifugal force since it is directed radially outward, but they used centripetal in the solution which added to my confusion with this question. I just don't understand why the scale reading (FN) doesn't equal FN= mv2cosθ/r + mg.
The authors used centripetal force because they looked at things from the perspective of an inertial frame. There is no centrifugal force in an inertial frame.

A frame with origin at the center of the Earth and in which the Earth is rotating is approximately an inertial frame. It isn't truly inertial because the Earth is accelerating toward the Sun and the Moon, and everything else out there. Ignoring those subtleties, this Earth centered, non-rotating frame is an inertial frame. Treating this frame as inertial, the only forces acting on the person standing on the scale are the downward force of gravity exerted by the Earth and the upward normal force exerted by the scale. It is this upward normal force that the scale measures.

A person standing on one of the poles is stationary in this frame. Newton's first law dictates that these two forces must sum to zero. The person's weight is simply mg at the poles. What about a person standing on the equator? This person is not stationary. He is instead accelerating, undergoing uniform circular motion about the Earth's rotation axis. The net force cannot be zero. It must point to the center of the Earth to yield that circular motion. This means the upward force exerted by the scale has to be less than the downward gravitational force.
 
  • #8
Chestermiller said:
Forget about using the specific words centrifugal and centripetal; they are just a source of confusion.
I agree with that advice.
 
  • #9
D H said:
The authors used centripetal force because they looked at things from the perspective of an inertial frame. There is no centrifugal force in an inertial frame.

A frame with origin at the center of the Earth and in which the Earth is rotating is approximately an inertial frame. It isn't truly inertial because the Earth is accelerating toward the Sun and the Moon, and everything else out there. Ignoring those subtleties, this Earth centered, non-rotating frame is an inertial frame. Treating this frame as inertial, the only forces acting on the person standing on the scale are the downward force of gravity exerted by the Earth and the upward normal force exerted by the scale. It is this upward normal force that the scale measures.

A person standing on one of the poles is stationary in this frame. Newton's first law dictates that these two forces must sum to zero. The person's weight is simply mg at the poles. What about a person standing on the equator? This person is not stationary. He is instead accelerating, undergoing uniform circular motion about the Earth's rotation axis. The net force cannot be zero. It must point to the center of the Earth to yield that circular motion. This means the upward force exerted by the scale has to be less than the downward gravitational force.

That bit really helped me clear things up.

[tex]F_N+m\frac{v^2}{r}=mg[/tex]

Thanks for the help everyone!
 

1. How does weight change at the North Pole compared to the Equator?

Weight does not actually change at the North Pole or the Equator. Weight is a measure of the force of gravity on an object, and this force is constant at any point on Earth. However, an object's weight may appear to change due to variations in the Earth's gravitational pull at different latitudes.

2. Is a person's weight different at the North Pole and the Equator?

No, a person's weight is determined by their mass and the strength of the Earth's gravitational pull. Since these factors do not change significantly at different latitudes, a person's weight will not be different at the North Pole or the Equator.

3. Does gravity affect weight differently at the North Pole and the Equator?

The strength of Earth's gravity does not differ significantly at different latitudes. However, the Earth's rotation causes a centrifugal force that slightly decreases the apparent weight of objects at the Equator compared to the poles. This effect is very small and only becomes noticeable when measuring extremely precise weights.

4. Are there any other factors that can affect weight at the North Pole and the Equator?

Aside from the Earth's gravitational pull and rotation, other factors such as elevation, atmospheric pressure, and even the density of the Earth's crust can have a small impact on weight. However, these effects are minimal and do not significantly change weight at different latitudes.

5. How does the weight of objects differ at the North Pole and the Equator?

Again, the weight of objects does not actually differ at the North Pole and the Equator. However, an object's weight may appear to be slightly different due to the variations in the Earth's gravitational pull and rotation at different latitudes. These differences are very small and are not noticeable in everyday life.

Similar threads

  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
690
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
17
Views
940
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
3K
Back
Top