I Changes to a spinning skater's angular velocity

AI Thread Summary
The discussion explores whether the changes in a skater's angular velocity can be described using F=ma instead of relying on the conservation of angular momentum (L = constant). It explains that as the skater pulls her arms in, the centripetal force acting on her hands increases, resulting in a stronger inward acceleration and an inward spiral trajectory. The hands maintain their original tangential velocity, leading to a greater angular velocity compared to the rest of the skater's body. However, the arms exert a tangential force that decelerates the hands, while simultaneously accelerating the skater's body forward. Overall, the principles of F=ma consistently predict the observed outcomes in the skater's motion.
Rosenthal
Messages
7
Reaction score
3
Can we describe what is happening as the skater's angular velocity increases/decreases using F=ma rather than invoking L = constant?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Can you be more specific about "what" it is that is "happening"?
 
Welcome!
"When a body is acted upon by a force, the time rate of change of its momentum equals the force."
Would you explain the meaning of L to us?
 
Rosenthal said:
using F=ma rather than invoking L = constant?
Why would you want to?
 
Rosenthal said:
Can we describe what is happening as the skater's angular velocity increases/decreases using F=ma rather than invoking L = constant?
Yes. We could. For instance, we could consider a force of each hand on the other (mediated through the arms and body). In the starting configuration, this centripetal force is sufficient to accelerate each hand in its circular path around the axis of the skater's body. ##F=ma## is upheld and the hands circle as predicted.

We could consider what happens if that centripetal force is increased. The skater pulls her arms in. Now the hands accelerate inward more strongly than their previous centripetal acceleration. They assume an inward spiral trajectory. ##F=ma## in the radial direction conforms with this and predicts the result.

Significantly, in the absence of any resisting tangential force from the body, the hands would retain their original tangential velocity. With a new position nearer to the axis of the skater's body, the retained tangential velocity means that the hands would then have an angular velocity greater than that of the rest of the skater's body. Again, this would be consistent with ##F=ma## in the tangential direction together with the supposition of zero tangential force.

But the arms resist that relative motion with a rearward tangential force. This force decellerates the hands in their tangential motion around the body. Again, ##F=ma## is upheld and predicts the observed result.

Newton's third law means that the body is subject to forward tangential force from the hands. The arms are accelerated and acquire a greater tangential velocity as a result. Again, ##F=ma## is upheld and predicts the more rapid rotation of the skater as a whole.
 
Consider an extremely long and perfectly calibrated scale. A car with a mass of 1000 kg is placed on it, and the scale registers this weight accurately. Now, suppose the car begins to move, reaching very high speeds. Neglecting air resistance and rolling friction, if the car attains, for example, a velocity of 500 km/h, will the scale still indicate a weight corresponding to 1000 kg, or will the measured value decrease as a result of the motion? In a second scenario, imagine a person with a...
Dear all, in an encounter of an infamous claim by Gerlich and Tscheuschner that the Greenhouse effect is inconsistent with the 2nd law of thermodynamics I came to a simple thought experiment which I wanted to share with you to check my understanding and brush up my knowledge. The thought experiment I tried to calculate through is as follows. I have a sphere (1) with radius ##r##, acting like a black body at a temperature of exactly ##T_1 = 500 K##. With Stefan-Boltzmann you can calculate...
Thread 'Griffith, Electrodynamics, 4th Edition, Example 4.8. (First part)'
I am reading the Griffith, Electrodynamics book, 4th edition, Example 4.8 and stuck at some statements. It's little bit confused. > Example 4.8. Suppose the entire region below the plane ##z=0## in Fig. 4.28 is filled with uniform linear dielectric material of susceptibility ##\chi_e##. Calculate the force on a point charge ##q## situated a distance ##d## above the origin. Solution : The surface bound charge on the ##xy## plane is of opposite sign to ##q##, so the force will be...
Back
Top