Conservation of angular momentum.

AI Thread Summary
Angular momentum is conserved around the bottom left corner of the described system because there are no external torques acting on it. The setup involves a square and a leaping mass, with the center of mass being crucial for analysis. Gravity, while acting on the system, does not exert a torque about the bottom left corner due to its line of action passing through that point. This means that the gravitational force does not create a moment arm, thus not affecting angular momentum conservation. Understanding these principles clarifies why angular momentum remains conserved in this scenario.
peripatein
Messages
868
Reaction score
0
Why is angular momentum conserved around the bottom left corner in the following set up (see attachment)? The attachment shows a square of side a and mass 4m, and a body of mass m leaping with velocity v0 as shown in the attachment towards the opposite side of the square. I have found the new center of mass of the system but do not quite understand why there would be no external torques in action around the bottom left corner. I'd appreciate some insight.
 

Attachments

  • untitled.JPG
    untitled.JPG
    3.1 KB · Views: 440
Physics news on Phys.org
There seems to be no external forces to produce any external torques.
 
What about gravity, acting downwards from the new center of mass (of the body that has leaped and reached the opposite side of the square and the square)? With respect to the bottom left corner, why won't gravity exercise a torque?
 

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

I Angular Momentum problem v2 (mass moving inward or outward)
Replies
5
Views
2K
I Conservation of Angular Momentum vs a gyro at the North Pole
Replies
16
Views
1K
I Conservation of angular momentum during collisions
Replies
3
Views
3K
I Effects of External Torques on the Angular Momentum of Asymmetric Bodies
Replies
3
Views
2K
2-body problem - conservation of angular momentum
Replies
40
Views
4K
Conceptual questions about Angular Momentum Conservation and torque
Replies
2
Views
3K
Conservation of linear and angular momentum
Replies
9
Views
2K
Conservation of Angular Momentum is Dumbfounding
Replies
36
Views
16K
Spinning Bike Wheel Example, how is angular momentum conserved?
Replies
9
Views
5K
The conservation of angular momentum
Replies
9
Views
5K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top