Does marbles have friction or not?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Carran Boey
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Friction
AI Thread Summary
Marbles do experience friction when rolling due to the interaction between their surface and the surface they roll on, despite having minimal contact. This friction is essential for rolling motion, as it provides the necessary force to prevent slipping and allows the marble to roll rather than slide. The discussion highlights that both static and dynamic friction play roles, with some energy loss occurring due to surface distortion. While the contact area is small, the friction still exists and contributes to the marble's motion. Understanding these frictional forces is crucial for comprehending the mechanics of rolling objects.
Carran Boey
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
People say that marbles experience friction when rolling across a surface,but i don't get why. The dynamic and static friction don't seem to fit here and the point is that it have a very little contact with the surface. Note that its not rubbing across the surface but rather rolling across it. You might give an example of the bowling ball,but the force used is to push it across the floor and not the kind of force to roll and ball and thus the bowling ball slides and causes friction. I really don't get why a marble experience a friction. HELP!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If there is no friction, the marble will just slide along the surface without any rolling. Friction is what is "pulling" the bottom of the ball, causing the top of the ball to fall, which makes it roll.
 
Also, when a real marble rolls on a real surface there will be a finite distortion of both surfaces - some stretching and compressing. This will involve some 'rubbing' and some energy loss - that will be 'dissipative' friction. There will also be some 'loss-less' friction which will be causing a force (analogous to a small scale version of gear teeth and more or less like what we call static friction)). But if there is no slipping / rubbing then there will be no 'force times distance' involved so no actual energy loss.
The Original Question has a number of possible answers, depending upon the depth of analysis that's required. (As usual!)
 
Thanks a lot! If the for the micro explanation,i would still have insisted on what i thought was right!
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top