Collision of undivisible particles

AI Thread Summary
Elastic collisions conserve kinetic energy, distinguishing them from the metaphor of rubber balls. Indivisible particles can collide without changing shape, as energy is stored and released in a manner similar to springs. The discussion clarifies that elastic collisions do not necessarily mimic the behavior of rubber balls. It emphasizes that energy conservation is key, regardless of the particles' physical characteristics. Overall, the nature of collisions is defined by energy dynamics rather than physical deformation.
ataskaita
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
Is it is true that all elastic collision are like rubber balls, then how does indivisible particles collide if they can't change their shape, that is store the energy inside like rubber balls and then release it?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Elastic collisions are collisions that conserve kinetic energy, not collisions that act like rubber balls. It sounds like you are taking some metaphor way too literally. Since energy is conserved, all collisions are elastic unless something changes in the particles/objects during the collision.
 
Their shapes change but returns as springs.
 
Thank you!
 

Thread 'Is calling fictitious forces "not real" just about terminology?'

Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
View full post »

Thread 'Derivation of Hamilton's Principle: Questions'

I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
View full post »

Similar threads

Simulating an elastic bouncy ball
Replies
10
Views
3K
Reference frame in collision problems
Replies
9
Views
1K
B Understanding Physics for Coding Collision of 2 Balls
Replies
14
Views
3K
How is it that momentum is being preserved in a non elastic collision?
Replies
3
Views
1K
B Conservation of momentum in a closed system
Replies
3
Views
2K
I Work Done/Energy Transferred in One Dimensional Collision
Replies
5
Views
2K
Counter-intuitive 2D collision
Replies
9
Views
2K
Why Does Second Collision in Ballistic Pendulum Lead to Initial State?
Replies
5
Views
1K
B Conservation of Momentum for system of particles
2
Replies
52
Views
4K
Elastic vs inelastic collisions
Replies
2
Views
6K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top