Calculating Angular Velocity with Moment of Inertia & Torque

AI Thread Summary
A disc with a moment of inertia of 23.4 kg m² is rotated by a torque, starting from rest and achieving a kinetic energy of 632.2 J after a certain time. To find the angular velocity, the equation KE = 0.5 * I * ω² can be used, where ω is the angular velocity. While the discussion touches on the concept of torque, it clarifies that torque is a real force that causes rotation, not just an imagined concept. The relationship between angular momentum, moment of inertia, and angular velocity is established, emphasizing that angular momentum can be calculated using the formula: angular momentum = moment of inertia * angular velocity. Overall, the conversation aims to clarify misconceptions about torque and its role in rotational dynamics.
kingyof2thejring
Messages
82
Reaction score
0
A disc of moment of inertia 23.4 kg m2 is made to rotate about an axis through its centre by a torque of T . The disc starts from rest, and after {t} s has kinetic energy 632.2 J. Calculate the angular velocity (in rad s-1) after {b} s.

if i work out the angular velocity from the KE=0.5*I*w^2 this equation how do i use it work out the angular momentum from t to b.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The problem doesn't actually ask for angular momentum, but you should be able to figure out the angular momentum from the moment of interia, and the angular velocity.
 
I have a doubt. Does something called as torque energy really exist. I have understood that torque is something imagined and does not actually exist fromthe explanation given to me on the post "right hand rule" in Gen Phys. Someone please explain.
 
What you are calling "torque energy" is just rotational kinetic energy. Why in the world would you think that torque is just something "imagined"?
 
I interpreted that right hand rule can be replaced by lefthand rule, so the direction of things like torque isn't fixed. It is just a convention. Anyway the explanation wasn't clear to me. The above reasons led me to the conclusion that the torque is just something imagined and does not really exist. I understood that I am through a wrong way. Please direct me in proper way.
 
vaishakh:
Direction of a torque may be defined in a conventional way but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Torques are just turning forces (or coupled linear forces). Have you never seen anything turn or rotate? (rhetorical question). Of course torques exist.

kingyof2thejring:
ang momentum = moment of inertia * ang velocity
(you have everything you need for the calculation)
 
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...
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Back
Top