Conservation of Momentum in Inelastic Collisions

Thread starter kevina
Start date Oct 5, 2007
Tags

Collisions Conservation Conservation of momentum Inelastic Momentum

AI Thread Summary

In inelastic collisions, momentum is conserved, meaning the total momentum before the collision equals the total momentum after the collision. The equation m_1\vec{v}_1 + m_2\vec{v}_2 = (m_1 + m_2)\vec{v}_f illustrates this principle, where m represents mass and v represents velocity. The vector nature of momentum indicates that both magnitude and direction must be considered in the calculations. Participants in the discussion referenced external resources to clarify concepts related to inelastic collisions. Understanding these principles is crucial for analyzing the behavior of colliding objects.

Oct 5, 2007

kevina

Can someone explain to me the vector nature of momentum in a case where two objects collide and stick together?

Physics news on Phys.org

Oct 5, 2007

Doc Al

Mentor

How about:
m_1\vec{v}_1 + m_2\vec{v}_2 = (m_1 + m_2)\vec{v}_f

Read this: Inelastic Collisions

Last edited: Oct 5, 2007

Oct 5, 2007

kevina

Yes! I remember seeing that link once before. I was looking for it but couldn't find it. Thanks Doc Al. :)

Thread 'Is calling fictitious forces "not real" just about terminology?'

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...

View full post »

Thread 'Derivation of Hamilton's Principle: Questions'

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...

View full post »