Question about momentum transfer

AI Thread Summary
Momentum transfer occurs much faster than the speed of the balls in a Newton's Cradle, primarily at the speed of sound in the material of the balls. While the initial ball moves at 1 meter/sec, the momentum is transmitted through atomic interactions, which happen at a significantly higher speed. This means that the effect of the collision is felt almost instantaneously along the line of balls, rather than taking the same time as the original ball's travel. The discussion highlights a common misconception in physics regarding the speed of momentum transfer versus the speed of the objects involved. Understanding this distinction is crucial for accurate simulations of momentum transfer in physical systems.
WraithGlade
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Hi.

I'm trying to figure out how transfer of momentum works so that I can simulate it reasonably accurately and understand it on an intuitive level.

My intuition goes like this:

Momentum must be conserved. Therefore, if for example I had a 1 meter long Newton's Cradle with numerous polished steel balls on it, spanning the whole length, then if a steel ball moving at 1 meter/sec collides head on with the left side of the array then the ball furthest to the right in the array will begin swinging away from the array exactly 1 second after the first ball collided with the left side.

In other words, my intuition is that in momentum space it would be as if the original ball had never collided at all and just continued traveling along the space. Whereas, in contrast, in physical space, this would amount to the momentum being transferred along the line in order to achieve the equivalent effect.

Is my intuition correct?

Is the amount of time momentum transfer requires in the presence of collisions equivalent to the amount of time the original momentum would have taken to traverse the system without the presence of the colliding bodies?

This is all of course assuming that no energy is lost anywhere.

Thanks for reading.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your intuition is wrong. The momentum transfer occurs much faster than the speed of the balls. If the balls were perfectly elastic I'm guessing that the momentum transfer would happen at the speed of sound in whatever material the balls were made out of.
 
seeing is believing

 
Last edited by a moderator:
There are two different mechanisms transferring the momentum here.

Before the impact, the momentum is being carried with the matter in the ball, as it moves. The "velocity of the momentum" is the same as the velocity of the ball, and could be anything.

The other mechanism is transferring momentum through a solid, by the forces acting between the atoms of the material. As #2 said, that always happens at the same speed, which is the speed of sound in the material. The speed of sound in most metals is about 5 times faster than in air.

But don't worry too much about being wrong here. The same sort of confusion can occur elsewhere in physics, for example the apparent speed of waves on the surface of water, compared with the motion of the water itself. The good thing is that you were thinking about what was going on.
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top