Deriving Moment of Inetia using just linear dynamics

AI Thread Summary
Moment of inertia can be derived using linear dynamics and calculus by considering a mass that accelerates while rotating in a circle. The relationship between force and torque is established through the equations F=ma and τ=rma, leading to τ=r²mα, where α represents angular acceleration. By summing the contributions of all mass elements, the total torque can be expressed as τ=∫r²dm(dω/dt). This approach provides an alternative method to derive moment of inertia without relying on energy equations. The discussion highlights the feasibility of using linear dynamics to understand rotational dynamics.
NANDHU001
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
Can moment of inertia be derived using just linear dynamics and calculus. Textbooks usually derive moment of inertia using energy equation and and analogy of 1/2mr^2w^2 with 1/2mv^2. I would like to know if it can be approached in a different manner using just linear dynamics.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, If you consider a mass being accelerated and rotates in a circle.
Then the acceleration is:

F=ma
multiply both sides by r:

\tau=rma=r^{2}m\alpha
where \alpha is the angular acceleration.
Take this sum of all masses:

\sum r^{2}dm

Or another way:

The force on a small element dm is:
dF=r\frac{d\omega}{dt}dm
then the torque on this small mass dm is:
d\tau= rdF=r^{2}\frac{d\omega}{dt}dm
integrating this over the total mass gives the total torque:
\tau=\int r^{2}dm\frac{d\omega}{dt}

Hope it helps
 
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...
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