Centripetal force and rotation

AI Thread Summary
Centripetal force causes an object, like a ball on a string, to rotate due to torque applied at the attachment point. If the string is connected to the ball's surface, the tension creates a torque that initiates rotation. In contrast, if the string is attached to the ball's center with frictionless bearings, the object can orbit without rotation, similar to satellites in space. However, gravitational effects can lead to tidal locking, where an orbiting body, like the Moon, rotates once per revolution. The discussion highlights the relationship between centripetal force, torque, and rotation in various contexts.
member 529879
I noticed that if you swing a ball around attached to a string with a centripetal force. The ball also rotates. What causes this rotation? Is there always rotation when there's a centripetal force? does an object orbiting the Earth always face the same way as it orbits?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The string normally attaches so that it is effectively tied to a point on the ball's surface. Naturally, the attachment point is pulled by the tension in the string. The side of the ball where the string comes out will be pulled to face the center of the circle. If the ball did not rotate to begin with, it would start to rotate because of this torque. So the ball rotates.

If the string were not tied to the surface of the ball but were connected to an axle through the ball's center which had some sort of magical frictionless bearings then no such torque would exist and no such rotation would need to start. This is essentially the situation for satellites in orbit. The effect of Earth's gravity is effectively applied on an orbitting object's center and is almost completely frictionless, so orbitting objects experience negligible net torque from gravity and are free to spin independently of their orbits.

As it turns out, gravity is not entirely frictionless if you consider tidal effects. So satellites such as the moon can become "tidally locked" to the Earth and rotate once per revolution, just like a ball on a string.
 
For a ball on the end of a string which is not rotating once per "orbit" the string exerts a torque about the ball's center. This torque causes the rotation you mention and disappears once the ball is rotating at the correct speed.
 
What others have said plus...

What do you mean by "rotate"? Rotate in which plane?

As you swing the ball around it will try to twist up the rope. If you hold the string in your hand you stop that end rotating so the ball must rotate once per revolution to stop the rope twisting up.

Edit: Ah I see Dale is referring to the same thing.
 
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