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.
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top