Register to reply

Conservation of angular momentum vs. linear momentum

Share this thread:
Curl
#1
Jan3-12, 07:08 PM
P: 757
From a little bit of thinking, this is what I concluded:

A system initially at rest can change its angular position without any outside torques (the final state will also be at rest).

A system initially at rest cannot change its displacement without an outside force.

In other words, cons. of linear momentum also implies that a system cannot move its CM without outside forces, however, cons. of angular momentum does not prohibit a body from changing its angular orientation without outside torques, due to the fact that rotational inertia can be changed internally.

Is this correct, or can anyone offer counterexamples?
Phys.Org News Partner Physics news on Phys.org
Symphony of nanoplasmonic and optical resonators produces laser-like light emission
Do we live in a 2-D hologram? New Fermilab experiment will test the nature of the universe
Duality principle is 'safe and sound': Researchers clear up apparent violation of wave-particle duality
torquil
#2
Jan4-12, 02:33 AM
P: 641
Quote Quote by Curl View Post
From a little bit of thinking, this is what I concluded:

A system initially at rest can change its angular position without any outside torques (the final state will also be at rest).
Only by moving through a set of configurations, all of which have vanishing total angular momentum. This is e.g. with two parallel wheels of different mass, that are able to rotate relatively to one another. But how do you define the "angular position" of such an object, analogously to the centre-of-mass for linear movements?

If you put coinciding angular marks on the wheels, and let them rotate in opposite directions, they may stop in a configuration where the marks again coincide, but at a different angular position since each wheel were of different mass, but this is due to the periodic topology of the set of angular position configurations.

A system initially at rest cannot change its displacement without an outside force.
In the same way as above, if the universe were periodic and the system consisted two massive object of unequal masses, they would be able to move in opposite directions at different speeds, all the while having a total of zero linear momentum. After one revolution around the periodic universe, they can stop and be at rest with respect to each other at a different linear position.

So if your linear space has a periodic topoogy, a composite object can also change the position of its centre-of-mass without breaking the law of conservation of linear momentum.
D H
#3
Jan4-12, 05:56 AM
Mentor
P: 15,164
Quote Quote by torquil View Post
Only by moving through a set of configurations, all of which have vanishing total angular momentum. This is e.g. with two parallel wheels of different mass, that are able to rotate relatively to one another.
A much better example is a cat. How do cats dropped upside down manage to land right side up? Just a couple of many publications on this problem (which turns out to have some applicability to the field of robotics):

TR Kane and MP Scher, A dynamical explanation of the falling cat phenomenon, Int'l J. Solids and Structures (1969)

R Montgomery, Gauge theory of the falling cat, Fields Inst. Commun., 1 (1993), 193-218.


Edit
For a non-technical summary of these two papers, see M Abrahams, Cat physics – and we are not making this up, The Guardian, 17 October 2011, http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/...ch-cat-physics

Curl
#4
Jan4-12, 11:46 AM
P: 757
Conservation of angular momentum vs. linear momentum

I was inspired by the cat when thinking this up, however this is not a threat about cat physics. Turns out, the angular displacement feat is possible because rotational inertia can be changed arbitrarily from within the system (without the need for outside torques). However, there is no linear analog to this, that is, mass cannot be changed within an isolated system therefore a net linear displacement is impossible without an outside force if it is initially at rest. Is this correct?
D H
#5
Jan4-12, 11:55 AM
Mentor
P: 15,164
Quote Quote by Curl View Post
However, there is no linear analog to this, that is, mass cannot be changed within an isolated system therefore a net linear displacement is impossible without an outside force if it is initially at rest. Is this correct?
J Wisdom, Swimming in Spacetime: Motion by Cyclic Changes in Body Shape, Science 21 March 2003: 1865-1869, DOI:10.1126/science.1081406.
http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/hand...pdf?sequence=2
jedishrfu
#6
Jan4-12, 12:17 PM
P: 2,974
Here's a article + video of how to do the swimming in case you are stranded in space and need to get back to your ship :-)

http://www.science20.com/hammock_phy...gh_empty_space
sophiecentaur
#7
Jan4-12, 12:42 PM
Sci Advisor
Thanks
PF Gold
sophiecentaur's Avatar
P: 12,157
I think this is bordering on 'reactionless propulsion' idea, which is one of those heretical ideas. Poor Prof. Eric Laithwaite was pilloried for investigating this in his later years, despite not being just 'nutty' about it.
Curl
#8
Jan4-12, 08:08 PM
P: 757
I meant to ask this question in the classical, newtonian sense, not GR or QM or anything like that.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Linear momentum conservation vs angular momentum conservation Classical Physics 2
Conservation of momentum in combination of angular and linear momentum General Physics 16
Conservation of Linear/Angular Momentum? Classical Physics 3
Conservation of Linear and Angular Momentum Introductory Physics Homework 5
Conservation of Momentum (Linear and Angular) Introductory Physics Homework 4