Centripetal acceleration problem (box sitting on a table)

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of centripetal acceleration as it applies to a box resting on a table, considering both inertial and non-inertial frames of reference. Participants explore the implications of Newton's laws in these different contexts, particularly in relation to gravitational and normal forces.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant posits that if a box on a table has no acceleration, the net force should be zero according to Newton's laws, raising a question about the role of centripetal acceleration when viewed from an external rotating frame.
  • Another participant suggests that while the box's weight is canceled by the normal force in a non-rotating scenario, the Earth's rotation introduces a non-zero net force directed towards the center of the Earth, indicating a need for a different model.
  • A third participant emphasizes that Newton's laws apply to inertial frames, and in the rotating frame of the Earth, fictitious forces like centrifugal force must be considered to maintain equilibrium.
  • Further clarification is provided that in a non-inertial frame, gravitational and centrifugal forces can be combined to create an effective gravitational acceleration that varies across the globe.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus, as there are competing views regarding the application of Newton's laws in different frames of reference and the implications for centripetal acceleration.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the limitations of applying Newton's laws in non-inertial frames without accounting for fictitious forces, and the assumptions underlying different models of motion are not fully resolved.

Physics guy
Messages
23
Reaction score
10
Let me imagine a box placed on a table. It has got no acceleration. If I were a person who trusted Newton's laws then I would argue that the net force on the box should be zero. Now in another situation I am an observer outside the Earth and I see that the box is rotating along with the earth, so it should have a centripetal acceleration and gravity provides it...but in the previous case, gravity was canceled by the normal reaction. So shouldn't the centripetal force also be zero. Please explain where I went wrong.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You've got the right intuition, but let's iron a few things out. :biggrin:

For a minute, forget about the Earth. Just imagine an idealised flat, rigid surface of infinite extent. Impose a uniform gravitational field ##-g \hat{\mathbf{y}}##. The book sitting on the table has its weight exactly canceled by the normal force exerted by the table, to satisfy the equilibrium condition.

If the Earth wasn't rotating, that would be a pretty good local model. In fact, even though the Earth is rotating, the rate of rotation is sufficiently slow that this is an approximately correct model.

But we might want to think about a different, maybe more accurate, model in which the Earth has non-zero rotational speed. To simplify the description, imagine the table is at the equator. As you correctly deduced, the net force on the book must now be non-zero and pointing toward's the Earth's centre, in order to provide the necessary acceleration ##\rho \omega^2## toward the centre. In other words, the magnitude of the weight will slightly exceed the magnitude of the normal force.

These two descriptions aren't in contradiction, simply because they're not describing the same scenario. The assumptions that underly the two models are different. :smile:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Physics guy said:
Let me imagine a box placed on a table. It has got no acceleration. If I were a person who trusted Newton's laws then I would argue that the net force on the box should be zero. Now in another situation I am an observer outside the Earth and I see that the box is rotating along with the earth, so it should have a centripetal acceleration and gravity provides it...but in the previous case, gravity was canceled by the normal reaction. So shouldn't the centripetal force also be zero. Please explain where I went wrong.
Newton's Laws apply to inertial frames. The rotating rest frame of the Earth is not exactly inertial. To make Newton's 2nd Law applicable there, you have to introduce inertial forces (here Centrifugal force):

Rotating rest frame of the Earth:
Gravity + Centrifugal + Normal = 0

Inertial frame where the Earth rotates:
Gravity + Normal = Centripetal

See also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotating_reference_frame
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Physics guy and vanhees71
To go along with what @A.T. said, in the non-inertial local frame you have the fictitious centrifugal force and the gravitational force. Since they are both proportional to mass you can simply add them together to get an overall “effective” g. This effective g will change from place to place over the globe.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jbriggs444 and vanhees71

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
2K