Action without equal and opposite reaction

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Jdo300
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Reaction
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Newton's laws, particularly the principle of action and reaction, as presented in a website that some participants find questionable. The conversation explores the implications of angular and linear momentum in various scenarios, with a focus on a specific device mentioned in the article.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that the author of the website misunderstands the relationship between angular and linear momentum, suggesting that both forms of momentum are conserved in collisions.
  • One participant claims that the device discussed in the article will not function as predicted, asserting that the author could verify this through experimentation.
  • Another participant critiques the author's analysis of a hybrid system involving a barbell and a mass, stating that the conservation of momentum is misrepresented and that the initial conditions must be accurately considered.
  • A participant emphasizes that the conservation laws have been consistently validated through experiments, indicating that the claims made in the article are erroneous.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the credibility of the website, with one referring to it as "silly" and questioning how it was discovered.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the validity of the claims made in the website, with multiple competing views regarding the application of Newton's laws and the analysis of momentum. No consensus is reached on the correctness of the arguments presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in the author's reasoning, particularly regarding the assumptions made about momentum conservation and the instantaneous nature of interactions in idealized scenarios.

Jdo300
Messages
548
Reaction score
5
Hi All,

I just read an interesting website talking about Newtons laws and how they apply in one respect but not in another (not referring to the quantum area). I personally have no opinion one way or another but thought it would be interesting to see what you all think :-).

http://montalk.net/science/90/action-without-equal-and-opposite-reaction

- Jason O
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, I think that the author is very wrong.

Carl
 
Yeah, he's wrong. Total momentum is what matters - having part of the momentum angular and part linear is not a contradiction of Newton's first.

And the device is an application of that error and doesn't work. If the writer chooses to do the math on that device, he'll find that it will not move. Better yet, he could build it and compare its motion to his prediction.
 
The author seems to forget that angular motion has linear motion as a part of it and vice versa. For example, look at the first diagram on the page, the one where a mass of mass M approaches a barbell system where two masses of mass M/2 are separated by a rod. You might make the argument that angular momentum is not conserved in the collision because initially, there's only linear momentum and the final product involves angular momentum. However, there actually is angular momentum involved before the collision. Picture a vector drawn from the center of mass of the system to the approaching mass M. The angle of this vector changes with time, so there is angular momentum (I can't remember the exact equation, but it involves a cross product). It should be reasonable obvious that linear momentum is conserved because when mass M hits the barbell, the barbell will not only spin, it will translate to the right. Finally, you could make the argument that energy that energy that goes into linear momentum doesn't go into angular momentum, but that ignores the fact that linear momentum and angular momentum are two different things that can't be added like translational and rotational energy.
 
From montalk.net:
Correct Method of Analyzing a Hybrid System: During initial conditions, the barbell was stationary and the first mass moved at a certain velocity. Thus, all energy was initially stored in the first mass...During final conditions, the first mass was stationary and the barbell moved, thus the final energy was stored entirely in the barbell.
(Note that this is for the first mass being M and the masses at the ends of the barbell each being M/2.)

This is entirely wrong! The only way for the first mass to lose all of its speed is for the masses at the barbell ends to have mass M. If they have mass M/2, then [itex]v_1'=v_1/3,\ v_2'=(4/3)v_1[/itex], and the speed of the barbell c.of.m is [itex]v_2'/2[/itex]. The fact that the mass that is hit is attached to another by a rod is irrelevant to the initial evaluation of the problem, since as is usual for these idealized cases, the interaction is assumed to be instantaneous.

Similarly, the cart that can begin moving just by internal interactions inside it, is wrong. The brick that kicks off the left end and then transfers motion to the internal wheel will bring the cart entirely to rest when it does so. Linear momentum is conserved with no qualifications.
 
A good homework problem is to demonstrate that the contents of the website are pure nonsense. Further, this problem is worked out in many textbooks; and, the normal way of solving the problem actually agrees with experiment. In fact, spending any more time on such nonsense is a waste of time.

That the conservation laws work for isolated systems has constantly been verified by experiment, no matter what the components of the system are. They, for example, were crucial in the establishment of the reality of neutrinos.

Beware of one-trick horses.

Regards,
Reilly Atkinson
 
Jdo300 said:
Hi All,

I just read an interesting website talking about Newtons laws and how they apply in one respect but not in another (not referring to the quantum area). I personally have no opinion one way or another but thought it would be interesting to see what you all think :-).

[silly website deleted]

- Jason O

So tell me, out of curiosity, how in the world did you find such a silly website?

Zz.
 
FredGarvin said:
I learn something new every day...

http://montalk.net/conspiracy/55/how-to-block-microwave-mind-programming-signals

That's a darned funny web site.


Man there's a much simple way to protect your brain from government control.
DIY aluminum foil hat: http://koti.mbnet.fi/roine/salaliitto/foliohattu.php

The captions are in Finnish though but a picture says more than a thousand words.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
10K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K