A lamp hanging on from the ceiling, Im scared is going to fall on me

  • Thread starter Thread starter headlesschicke
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fall Lamp
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around concerns about a ceiling lamp's stability after being raised closer to the ceiling. The user initially feared that the main hook would bear more weight and risk falling, but responses clarified that the weight on the main hook has actually decreased due to the new setup. The physics principle of force, defined by Newton's formula (Force = mass * acceleration), was mentioned to explain the situation. The conversation also humorously touched on the lamp's power cord and its potential impact on safety if it were to fail. Overall, the main concern was alleviated, confirming that the lamp is secure in its new position.
headlesschicke
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
hello, I am new to this forum (so bear with me)

I've got a lamp on the ceiling of my kitchen, its got a particular setup that Ill try to reproduce


ceiling---------------------------------------------------------
-----------------hook------------------------hook--------
-----------------extra chain------------------chain with lamp attached


---------------------------me cooking delicious food terrified the glass lamp is going to fall on my pretty face and deform me like horrible universal monster---------------------


so the deal is, the lamp used to hang lower, meaning there was like 15 inches of chain between the lamp and the main hook nailed to the celing. Now because I am gorgeous and tall I've decided to raise the lamp higher so the light can illuminate further. I know, I know, its an awesome idea, how do I come up with these ideas by myself? I truly don't know, its just inspiration, magic if you want.

Now the lamp is very close to the ceiling and very high, I've had to move the extra chain to the secondary hook. My questions are:

1/ if you can visualize the setup, is now the main hook bearing more weight than before now that the lamp is closer to the hook, therefore is the hook in danger of separating from the ceiling and falling into my head, or my cats heads (big surprise but I am single and live with cats, what a catch! I am open to offers clever ladies)

2/ which formula would you apply to calculate this

3/ finally this is the drawing of the situation (you can keep it, its my way of giving something back to humanity)

RG1pcCT.png
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hello headlesschicke welcome to pf! :smile:
headlesschicke said:
1/ … is now the main hook bearing more weight than before now that the lamp is closer to the hook, therefore is the hook in danger of separating from the ceiling and falling into my head, or my cats heads (big surprise but I am single and live with cats, what a catch! I am open to offers clever ladies)

no, the hook is bearing less weight than before

it is now bearing the whole weight of the lamp, and the weight of that short piece of chain, and half the weight of the rest of the chain

(before, it was bearing the whole weight of the rest of the chain)

i assume you are thinking that the higher the lamp is, the more force the hook must be doing to keep it there …

no, you did the work to get it there, the hook only has to use the force to keep it there, and the keeping force is the same at any height :wink:
 
thanks for the answer and for not taking the piss out of my poorly formulated and pretty obvious question

which formula would you apply in this case? or what physics principle?
 
The main difference in the setup now is that, should the main hook let go, the secondary hook should tend to swing the falling lamp away from that pipe-cleaner figure directly below, until a point where the secondary hook, too, let's go. :smile:

The lamp's power cord will play a part during that sequence, but not much can be foretold as the placement of the cord has not been shown in your blueprint.

One consolation will be that, after the power cord separates, you won't see what hit you. :biggrin:
 
NascentOxygen said:
The main difference in the setup now is that, should the main hook let go, the secondary hook should tend to swing the falling lamp away from that pipe-cleaner figure directly below, until a point where the secondary hook, too, let's go. :smile:

The lamp's power cord will play a part during that sequence, but not much can be foretold as the placement of the cord has not been shown in your blueprint.

blueprint?... oh yes, definitely my highly accurate and precise blueprint drawn with ms paint. to be honest I don't know where the lamp cord is... in fact now that you mention it... god that's weird, where the heck is the power cord? I am going to send a furry messenger to investigate the matter further. you know what's sad? that I didnt even think about it. that's sad and I am not even joking

NascentOxygen said:
One consolation will be that, after the power cord separates, you won't see what hit you. :biggrin:

always wanted to go doing the thing I most enjoy, washing the dishes. Some of us are truly privileged

on the other hand if there's no power cord could I be anticipating a slow and painful death?, which is how I always envisioned my ending. That and with my pants down, for some reason (probably to take away the last drop of semi dignity I may have by that point)
 
which formula would you apply in this case? or what physics principle?

Newton..

Force = mass * acceleration

You have reduced the mass hanging from the main hook. Some is now supported by the other hook.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top