Circular Motion with Decreasing Radius

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between tangential speed and radius in the context of circular motion, specifically when the radius is decreased. Participants are examining the implications of changing the radius on the tangential speed and centripetal force.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between centripetal force, tangential speed, and radius, questioning whether the tangential speed should double or halve when the radius is reduced. Some participants present mathematical proofs to support their reasoning, while others challenge the logic presented.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants actively questioning each other's reasoning and attempting to clarify their understanding of the relationships involved. Some have identified potential errors in reasoning, while others are exploring different representations of the variables involved.

Contextual Notes

There is a focus on maintaining the same ratio of centripetal force as the radius changes, leading to debates about the implications of this on tangential speed. Participants are also addressing issues related to the correct application of mathematical principles in their arguments.

uSee2
Messages
57
Reaction score
7
Homework Statement
One end of a string is attached to a ball, with the other end held by a student such that the ball is swung in a horizontal circular path of radius R at a constant tangential speed. At a later time, the tension force exerted on the ball remains constant, but the length of the string is decreased to R/4. What is the new tangential speed of the ball?
Relevant Equations
##F_c = \frac {mv^2} R##
The answer key states that the new tangential speed is half the original speed. However, this isn't correct right? It should double.

My proof:

##F_c = \frac {mv^2} R##
##F_c = F_t##
##\frac {mv^2} {\frac R 4} = \frac {m(2v)^2} R## If centripetal force were to stay constant.
As such, tangential velocity should double right? It should not half?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your logic is faulty. The centripetal force is, as you say, ##F_c =\frac{mv^2}{R}.## For the fraction to remain constant, if the denominator is decreased by a factor of 4, the numerator must also decrease by a factor of 4. Since the speed in the numerator is squared (##v^2=v*v##), each of the v's must decrease by a factor of 2 when the radius is decreased by a factor of 4.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: uSee2, scottdave and topsquark
kuruman said:
Your logic is faulty. The centripetal force is, as you say, ##F_c =\frac{mv^2}{R}.## For the fraction to remain constant, if the denominator is decreased by a factor of 4, the numerator must also decrease by a factor of 4. Since the speed in the numerator is squared (##v^2=v*v##) each of the v's must decrease by a factor of 2 when the radius is decreased by a factor of 4.
But couldn't the denominator decrease and the numerator increase instead and give the same ratio?

##\frac {mv^2} {\frac R 4} * \frac 4 4 = \frac {4mv^2} R##
Then it is equal to
##\frac {m(2v)^2} R##
Isn't this true?
 
uSee2 said:
But couldn't the denominator decrease and the numerator increase instead and give the same ratio?

##\frac {mv^2} {\frac R 4} * \frac 4 4 = \frac {4mv^2} R##
Then it is equal to
##\frac {m(2v)^2} R##
Isn't this true?
Try using two different symbols for the first velocity and the second velocity.

$$\frac {mv_1^2} {R} = \frac {mv_2^2} {\frac R 4}$$

Well I cannot get my Latex to display correctly, but try it on your own.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: uSee2 and TSny
uSee2 said:
But couldn't the denominator decrease and the numerator increase instead and give the same ratio?
No. The new ratio must be the same as the old ratio.
Old ratio = ##\frac{mv^2}{R}##.
New ratio (according to you) = ##\frac{m(2v)^2}{R}.##

Are they the same?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: uSee2
uSee2 said:
But couldn't the denominator decrease and the numerator increase instead and give the same ratio?

##\frac {mv^2} {\frac R 4} * \frac 4 4 = \frac {4mv^2} R##
Then it is equal to
##\frac {m(2v)^2} R##
Isn't this true?
Yes, and that is exactly what the answer key says. The new tangential speed, v, is half the original, 2v.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: uSee2
haruspex said:
Yes, and that is exactly what the answer key says. The new tangential speed, v, is half the original, 2v.
kuruman said:
No. The new ratio must be the same as the old ratio.
Old ratio = ##\frac{mv^2}{R}##.
New ratio (according to you) = ##\frac{m(2v)^2}{R}.##

Are they the same?
I do see that they aren't the same. But when I tried it again with different symbols just like @scottdave said:

2 is after the label for when radius is reduced, 1 is the label for before.

##F_{c2} = \frac {mv_2^2} {R_2}##

##F_{c1} = \frac {mv_1^2} {R_1}##

##F_{c1} = F_{c2}##

##R_2 = \frac 1 4 {R_1}##

##\frac {mv_1^2} {R_1}= \frac {mv_2^2} {R_2}##

##\frac {mv_1^2} {R_1}= \frac {mv_2^2} {\frac 1 4 R_1}## Substitution of ##R_2 = \frac 1 4 {R_1}##

Multiply each side by ##\frac {R_1} {m}##

##\frac {v_2^2} {\frac 1 4} = v_1^2##

##v_2^2 = 4v_1^2##

Take the square root of each side

##v_2 = 2v_1##

The new speed is double the original speed I think, I may have made an error though.
 
uSee2 said:
##\frac {v_2^2} {\frac 1 4} = v_1^2##

##v_2^2 = 4v_1^2##
Check how you went from the first equation to the second equation.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: scottdave and uSee2
TSny said:
Check how you went from the first equation to the second equation.
Ohh!! I can't believe I made that mistake. Thank you so much for catching that. I see now that ##v_2 = \frac 1 2 v_1##
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: scottdave

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
55
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K