Are Net Forces Greater When Both Objects A and B Are in Motion During Collision?

AI Thread Summary
When two objects, A and B, collide while both are in motion, the net forces exerted on each object are a result of their interaction, which is consistent across different frames of reference. The forces involved are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction, regardless of which object is stationary or in motion. The terminology of "action" and "reaction" can be misleading, as it implies a distinction that does not affect the physical reality of the collision. The analysis shows that the net force during a collision is not inherently greater when both objects are in motion compared to when only one is moving. Ultimately, the conservation of momentum remains valid in all scenarios of collision.
donaldparida
Messages
146
Reaction score
10
Suppose there are two objects, denoted by A and B. When they collide with each other with the condition that A is stationary and B is in motion, B exerts an action force on A due to which A exerts a reaction force on B. Thus the net force exerted on A is FactionAB and the net force exerted on B is FreactionBA. Same is the case when A is in motion and B is at rest. But when A and B collide when they are in motion, the net force exerted on A is FactionAB + FreactionAB and the net force exerted on B is FactionBA + FreactionBA.
Question: Is my reasoning correct for the case when A and B collide when they are in motion? Is the net force exerted on A and B when they collide when they are in motion greater in magnitude than the net force exerted on A and B when they collide when only one of them is in motion?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The force depends how fast they are moving relative to each other.

In fact, all three scenarios are essentially the same: the same collision in different frames of reference. If you wanted to analyse a collision where both objects are moving it's a good idea to change your reference frame to one in which only one object is moving.

Finally, for this reason, there is only really one pair of action -reaction forces in each case.
 
  • Like
Likes donaldparida
@PeroK, Is it possible to explain that there is one pair of action-reaction forces without changing the frame of reference?
 
donaldparida said:
Question: Is my reasoning correct for the case when A and B collide when they are in motion?
No, you got confused by the physically meaningless "action / reaction" terminology.

donaldparida said:
Is it possible to explain that there is one pair of action-reaction forces ...
There is one pair of equal but opposite forces, because there is one interaction. Forget the "action / reaction" labels. The case where both move shows why they are meaningless.
 
As A.T says, there is only one force exerted by A on B and only one force exerted by B on A. These two forces are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction. This does not depend on which is moving and which is not. This is so in all cases.
 
"action" an "reaction" are only logical concepts, who is who is relative, if we take the reference frame of one of the objects we can consider the moving object is "acting" and the stopped object "reacting" but in a third reference frame we would only have two objects colliding, the forces must be opposite so that the momentum is conserved.
 
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