Stuck on Physics Homework: Q3 Part C

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on difficulty with part c of a physics homework question regarding rotating frames and the Coriolis force. The user expresses confusion despite reviewing solutions to earlier parts of the question and suggests that the textbook may contain an error regarding the direction of deflections. They emphasize that the Coriolis force is dependent on vector velocity, which can change sign, and mention the relevance of conservation of angular momentum. There is also an offer to share a scanned section of the textbook for further clarification. The conversation highlights the complexities of understanding forces in non-inertial reference frames.
ehrenfest
Messages
2,001
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


http://www.physics.oregonstate.edu/~mcintyre/COURSES/ph429_S06/hw1.pdf

See question 3. I am really stuck trying to answer part c. I looked over the solutions to parts a and b and I really just cannot figure out what is going on. This is very weird.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
a rotating frame is not an inertial reference frame
 
thanks, but I really don't see how that answers the question

In fact, I think that Marion and Thornton make an error in their book. There is no reason why the deflections should be in different directions. Does anyone have the book? If not, I can scan the relevant section which is like 2 pages long if someone agrees to read it.
 
Last edited:
The Coriolis force is proportional to vector velocity, which changes sign.
You can also see this using conservation of angular momentum.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top