Angular Momentum Term Equals Zero?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on a classical mechanics problem involving angular momentum in a system with two masses, one hanging and one on a table. The participant is trying to understand why a specific term, involving sin(2θ), is set to zero in the angular momentum equation. They derive the angular momentum vector but are confused about the implications of the term being zero, questioning whether it relates to the fixed radius or the effects of gravity on the hanging mass. Another contributor points out an error in the participant's derivation and suggests using polar coordinates for clarity. The conversation emphasizes the importance of correctly applying trigonometric identities in angular momentum calculations.
KleZMeR
Messages
125
Reaction score
0
Hi All,

This is from a classical mechanics problem, and I already 'solved' the problem, but I'm interested in why a certain term is set to zero. I think I understand the concept but just want to clarify.

The problem is a table with a hole in it and two masses on a string, one mass is hanging through the hole with only a Z component, and the other is on the table with an X and Y component (Z plane).


When I take the cross product of R x mV, I get the angular momentum vector K which has only a 'vertical' component:
R x mV = [m*(r^2)*dθ + m*r*dr*sin(2θ)] K


But I am told that:
R x mV = m*(r^2)*dθ K


The sin(2θ) came from some trig identity work. So I am wondering is this because there is no effect on the K vector from a sin(2θ) factor which is only in the Z plane? Why is this term 0? Is dr = 0 ? I think r is fixed but the problem does say that gravity affects the hanging mass, so perhaps dr in the Z plane is not zero? Any help understanding this is appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There is an error in your derivation of equation for angular momentum. Without seeing the derivation, I cannot say what this error is. A simple, if somewhat cumbersome/ way to obtain the angular momentum in polar coordinates is by writing ## x = r \cos \theta, \ y = r \sin \theta ##, then writing ## \dot x = ..., \ \dot y = ... ## and taking their cross product.
 
Here is my attempt, I uploaded it
 

Attachments

  • angularmomentumattempt.jpg
    angularmomentumattempt.jpg
    62.1 KB · Views: 536
So you have ## mr [\dot r \cos \theta \sin \theta + ... - \dot r \sin \theta \cos \theta + ... ] ## yet you write ## = mr [ ... + 2\dot r \cos \theta \sin \theta] ##.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
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...
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