Can You Master the Art of Throwing a Spinning Card?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Leptyx
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Spinning
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the physics behind throwing a spinning card, highlighting how the shape of the object affects its lift and stability. It explains that without spinning, the card would pitch up or down, but spinning converts this pitch into a roll, enhancing control. Flat objects like cards experience more pronounced pitching effects compared to aerodynamic shapes like frisbees, which are designed to balance lift. The conversation suggests further exploration of frisbee physics for a deeper understanding. Mastering the art of throwing a spinning card involves understanding these aerodynamic principles.
Leptyx
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
EDIT : solved, thanks :)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Depending on the shape of the object the lift on the front and rear halves isn't the same and this would cause it to pitch up/down if it wasn't spinning. As I understand it the spinning converts this pitch effect into a roll effect.

I believe this effect is worse for flat plate like objects and less for frissbees like shapes that are designed to balance the lift in the fore/aft plane... but I'm no expert!

Perhaps read up on the physics of the frissbee?
 

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

I Energy of spinning objects as axis of rotation moves
Replies
1
Views
1K
Explanation of how spin art machine works
Replies
4
Views
6K
Can a Spinning Astronaut Use a Tethered Bowling Ball to Gain Motion in Space?
Replies
2
Views
1K
I Counter-rotating mass to counteract inertial spin
Replies
10
Views
2K
Strange turn of a rotating playing card when I throw it
Replies
15
Views
3K
Pool Ball Physics: Questions on Impact Spins
Replies
5
Views
3K
Understanding Earth's Spinning Speed: A Simple Explanation
Replies
13
Views
3K
Spinning Bike Wheel Example, how is angular momentum conserved?
Replies
9
Views
5K
How large of a flywheel can my motor spin?
Replies
12
Views
11K
Why Does a Spinning Object Wobble but Not Tumble?
Replies
20
Views
6K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top