Calculating Block's Backward Pull in Physics Problem?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a grade 12 physics problem involving a block being pulled over a right-angle triangle at a 35.7-degree angle. The key question is how to calculate the backward pull of the block in relation to its acceleration. The solution involves using the sine function to find the component of gravitational force acting parallel to the incline, which is essential for understanding the forces at play. The participant expresses initial confusion but gains clarity after receiving guidance. The explanation highlights the importance of resolving forces into their components in physics problems.
mayodt
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Hey, I have a question I'm stuck on for my grade 12 physics class. There is a block being pulled by tension over a triangle essentially that's at a degree of 35.7 (right angle triangle). I understand the whole question but I don't understand how to find how much pull the block has backwards of it's acceleration? It says it's the mass x gravity x sin 35.7. Why is sin theta added in there? Sorry if this is difficult to understand, if I could draw the picture, this would be so much easier. Thanks if anyone understands my question/can help me out.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
They found the component of the gravitational force parallel to the incline. Read this: http://www.physicsclassroom.com/Class/vectors/u3l3e.cfm"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh alright, I understand it now, thank you. I didn't think of it that way :biggrin:
 

Thread 'Is calling fictitious forces "not real" just about terminology?'

Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
View full post »

Thread 'Derivation of Hamilton's Principle: Questions'

I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
View full post »

Similar threads

B What is the Absolute Value of the Normal force on a block on this wedge?
Replies
3
Views
1K
Newton's law problem: Pushing 2 stacked blocks on a horizontal table
Replies
13
Views
3K
Force pulling on a string at an angle with a block at the other end
Replies
2
Views
1K
Newton's laws and their implications on plain old geometry
Replies
7
Views
2K
Is true force just "accepted" if it satisfies Newton law?
Replies
6
Views
2K
Solving Newton's 2nd Law: Wx = W Sin θ
Replies
13
Views
4K
Newton's law of cooling - formula for constant k
Replies
4
Views
4K
A question about Newton's laws & free body diagrams....
Replies
6
Views
2K
Static Friction Required to Keep the System from Moving (Two Boxes)
Replies
16
Views
3K
Newton's laws — Two stacked blocks sliding on a frictionless floor
Replies
17
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top