ANS: Forces and Angular Motion at the North Pole and Equator

AI Thread Summary
At the North Pole, a person weighing 600 N will weigh 579.9 N at the equator due to the effects of centrifugal force. The problem focuses on the difference in weight caused by Earth's rotation, which necessitates using the formula for centripetal force (mv²/r). To find the weight at the equator, the centrifugal force must be subtracted from the gravitational force. The velocity (v) at the equator is derived from Earth's angular spin multiplied by the radius. Understanding these forces is crucial for solving the problem correctly.
SS2006
Messages
80
Reaction score
0
Suppose the Earth is a perfect sphere with R = 6370 KM. If a person weighs exactly 600 N at the north pole, how much will the person weigh at the equator.? (Hint: The upward push of hte scale on the person is what the scale will read and is what we aer calling the weight in this case)
ANS: 579.9 N

this is on a angular motin in a plane work sheet, i got all the ones above but here I am blanked
i can't use energy equations, nor mv2/r, or can i? i don't know how ot attempt this.
or is it f = g m1 m2 / r2?
i just need a kickstart
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, you don't use energy equations, this problem has nothing to do with energy- only force. You don't NEED to use Gm1m2/r2 because you are already told that the force due to gravity is 600 N. The difference between the north pole and the equator is the centrifugal "force" at the equator so you CAN use mv2/r.
Subtract the force necessary to hold the person in circular motion at the equator from the 600 N. That will be the reading on the scale.
 
i need more ideas
dont know how to start
are you saing
mv2/r = 600 - t?
what do i use for v2
and m
 
The speed (v2) would be the velocity at the equator that would be the angular spin of the Earth around its axis times the radius. The mass would be the mass of the person. You can determine this from the 600N. Then just subtract the mv2/r from 600.
 
These are the equations from the force diagram you should be contemplating for the guy at the North Pole:

F_{grav} - F_{normal} = ma = 0

For the equator:

F_{grav} - F_{normal} = ma = m\frac{v^2}{r}

Fnormal is the reading on your scale. Does it make sense?
 
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top