Conservation of angular momentum and energy

AI Thread Summary
When a spinning body changes shape, its moment of inertia alters, affecting its angular velocity while conserving angular momentum due to the absence of net torque. The rotational kinetic energy may change, leading to a conversion of excess kinetic energy into translational motion. The work required to pull weights closer in a spinning system illustrates this energy transformation, as does the work generated when weights are allowed to move outward. The direction of angular velocity can change, influenced by the shape change's effect on the inertial tensor. Overall, both energy and angular momentum are conserved in such scenarios.
StatusX
Homework Helper
Messages
2,570
Reaction score
2
if you have a spinning body, and then its shape changes so that the moment of inertia changes, what happens? If angular velocity is conserved, since there's no net torque, then it spins a different speed, but the same direction. But then has the rotational kinetic energy changed? And if so, does this mean the excess kinetic energy must take the form of translational motion? Does it matter if the change in shape was symmetrical?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Consider a very simple example - two weights connected by a cord spinning around their common center.

If you pull the weights in, it will require work to do so. (The easiest way to see this is to go to a non-inertial frame that's corotating with the weights, and consider the centrifugal force). Similarly, if you let the weights go out, work will be generated and must be dissipated (perhaps by friction).

Energy and angular momentum will both be conserved.
 
The (instantaneous) angular velocity may well change its direction, since (for one) we cannot assume that the shapechange does not affect the inertial tensor (with respect to the C.M).
The angular momentum, remains, however, constant.
 
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...
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...
Back
Top