Conservation of momentum VS friction

AI Thread Summary
When a train stops suddenly, the conservation of momentum principle indicates that the momentum of the train is transferred to loose objects, such as passengers. While friction between the passenger and the seat does cause some deceleration, it is minimal compared to the initial speed of the train. The larger mass of the train means that the end velocity of the passengers will still be significant, even after accounting for friction. An external force acting on the train disrupts momentum conservation for the system as a whole, but individual passengers continue moving forward due to inertia. Understanding these dynamics clarifies how forces interact during sudden stops.
FelBEach
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
If you are in a moving train and the train stops instantly would you hit the object ahead of you at the exact same speed the train was traveling or would there be some slight deceleration due to friction? Wouldn't the friction your body experiences with the seat you are sitting on and the air around you cause you to decelerate even at a very minute rate?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are correct in the point that friction acts to slow the passanger down a little (very little).

However, if a train moves and suddenly stops, it loses its momentum (which has to be conserved at all costs), so that momentum is now shared between every "loose" object in the train (people etc.)

For conservation of momentum we have that

m(train+loose objects)*v.initial=m(loose objects)*v.end

The train has a much larger mass than the loose objects, so the end velocity for them has to be a lot larger than when they were moving with the same speed as the train.

Conclusion, friction slows the passenger down a little, but the passengers total velocity is still larger than when moving at the same speed as the train.
 
when I said the train stops I was thinking the train hit some type of immovable object causing an immediate stop. Wouldn't the momentum from the train be just absorbed by the object and your body would only be moving because it was moving to begin with and just hasn't been stopped yet?
 
Ofey said:
You are correct in the point that friction acts to slow the passanger down a little (very little).

However, if a train moves and suddenly stops, it loses its momentum (which has to be conserved at all costs), so that momentum is now shared between every "loose" object in the train (people etc.)

For conservation of momentum we have that

m(train+loose objects)*v.initial=m(loose objects)*v.end

The train has a much larger mass than the loose objects, so the end velocity for them has to be a lot larger than when they were moving with the same speed as the train.

Conclusion, friction slows the passenger down a little, but the passengers total velocity is still larger than when moving at the same speed as the train.
This is completely incorrect. Momentum of the "train + loose objects" is not conserved--there is an external force acting on the train!

FelBEach said:
when I said the train stops I was thinking the train hit some type of immovable object causing an immediate stop. Wouldn't the momentum from the train be just absorbed by the object and your body would only be moving because it was moving to begin with and just hasn't been stopped yet?
Perfectly correct. Your body will continue moving in a straight line at constant speed unless acted upon by some force. (This is Newton's 1st law.) The seat friction (hopefully) will slow you down a bit before you collide into something.
 
Of course, I am terribly sorry :frown: I was just thinking that the train stopped, never thought about the force making it stop, which obviously has to exist.
 
Thanks, you guys helped me a lot. respect
 
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
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?
Back
Top