Combination of translation and spinning, not rolling

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the dynamics of a spinning object that is also moving linearly, specifically in scenarios without friction or rolling. The user is exploring how linear motion affects the tangential velocities of points on the object's circumference, noting that the net tangential velocity consistently equals twice the center of mass velocity. This finding challenges the conventional understanding of rolling dynamics, suggesting that the relationship holds true even outside typical rolling scenarios. The user seeks mathematical resources to further understand this phenomenon. The conversation highlights the complexities of rotational dynamics in non-frictional contexts.
liometopum
Messages
126
Reaction score
24
All the texts and sites I can find discuss the rotational dynamics of pure rotation, pure translation, or a combination of an object rolling without slipping. I am trying to resolve some rotational dynamics regarding a spinning object that is moving linearly.. such as a planet in space or a tiny particle. No friction, not rolling. Sort of slipping without friction loss.

I have a diagram attached. The blue arrows represent the linear motion of the center of mass. The linear velocity adds to or subtracts from the tangential velocities of the points on the circumference.

Does anyone have a good source for the math of this option?
 

Attachments

  • spin and translate.jpg
    spin and translate.jpg
    13.1 KB · Views: 568
Physics news on Phys.org
In working on this, I just found that the net tangential velocity is always 2 times the velocity of the center of mass, regardless of translational velocity. I'd thought rolling was a special case, but surprise... the tangential velocities net out to 2 * velocity of the center of mass.
 
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