Rotating fluid, curl and suspended object rotation

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the dynamics of a cylinder of perfectly rotating fluid characterized by a velocity field with a curl of -2k. When an infinitely light ball is placed in this fluid, the question arises regarding the ball's rotation speed. The initial assumption equates the ball's angular velocity to that of a solid object in a rotating frame, suggesting it would rotate at -1 rad/s. However, the relationship between the ball's angular velocity and the fluid's curl indicates that the ball's rotation speed should actually be half of the curl value. This leads to the conclusion that the ball's angular velocity is effectively -1, which does not match the curl of -2, highlighting a discrepancy in the initial assumptions.
luca-deltodesco
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I'm trying to figure this out.

Say you have a cylinder of perfectly rotating fluid, so that it's velocity field is:
F(x,y,z) = yi - xj
which has curl -2k

assuming there is 'infinite' fluid drag and you have an 'infinitely' light ball which you place into the fluid at any point (let's say it's centre).

then how fast would the ball be rotating?

In my head I equate this to having a ball cemented into a rotating cylinder of concrete (or simply an object sat ontop of a spinning disc) and it would have an angular velocity of -1rad/s.

but at the same time, it would seem to me that the spinning object should have an angular velocity equal to the curl of the fluid at that point, and of course -1 =/= -2
 
Physics news on Phys.org
... okay nevermind:

tl;dr from wikipedia's 'intuitive interpretation' of curl:

ang. velocity of the ball is 'half' the curl >.>
 
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