Confusion about the nature of torque.

AI Thread Summary
Torque is defined as the product of the force applied and the perpendicular distance from the axis of rotation, which can be intuitively understood through practical examples like using a wrench versus fingers to tighten a screw. The discussion highlights that the effectiveness of torque relates to the conservation of energy, where a greater distance from the axis allows for less force to achieve the same work. It emphasizes that only the perpendicular distance matters in torque calculations because it influences the distance traversed by the points in motion. Newton's laws do not directly apply to this concept, as the relationship between force and rotational motion is governed by the principles of work and energy conservation. Understanding torque through these principles clarifies its fundamental nature in mechanics.
siddharth5129
Messages
94
Reaction score
3
I just read another post on this website about torque and the reason for its definition as the product of the perpendicular distance of the point of application of the force from the axis of rotation and the force itself ( ignoring the vector properties of the above quantities). The explanation by one of the users gives an intuitive experimental verification process about tightening a screw using your fingers and using a wrench to do the same( which requires far less force) and states that it is a fundamental observation and is just the way things work. I don't know if this is entirely true. Can a justification for the above be drawn in terms of Newton's laws ( which i think are the set of fundamental observations in this case and are "just the way things work." ).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Excellent question. Its admirable to seek out a true understanding of these simple concepts that so many people gloss over.

The way I try to think about torque, is in terms of conservations. You can think about the following example in terms of wrenches or in terms of levers, its the same idea. Consider a solid, rigid metal bar, fixed to rotate about its left end. Slightly to the right (lets say, point 'A') is some object that its doing work on as it is rotated (e.g. compressing a spring, or tightening a screw). At the opposite end (the right-end, let's call it point 'B'), you are able to turn the bar (exert a force on it).

As you push upon point B, and rotate the bar by some small amount, point A will be moved a lesser distance (or angle, or whatever). Thus for the work (W = F \times d) to be the same, the force is greater at A than at B, because the distance traversed is lesser at A than at B.

This is also the reason why only the perpendicular distance is relevant to the calculation, as it effects the change in traversed-distance for the two points. This is the same as for a 'parallax,' there must be a separation perpendicular to the direction of relative motion.
 
hey thanks zhermes... that makes sense. But could this be explained in terms of Newtons laws. I was thinking something along the lines of rate of change of velocity of a point(which would be more for a point closer to the axis and less for a point further away , given the same displacement of the point) . But i seem unable to draw up a satisfactory explanation from there.
 
No, Newton's laws of motion have no application here- how fast you turn the screw has nothing to do with the force. It is entirely "conservation of energy" and "work= force times distance" as zhermes says.
 
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...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
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?
Back
Top