Defining Torque: Why F*d? - 65 characters

  • Thread starter Thread starter G01
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Torque
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the definition of torque, specifically the equation τ = F · d, where d represents the distance from the center of rotation. Participants are exploring the foundational reasoning behind this definition and its implications in physics.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning why torque is defined as τ = F · d and whether this definition is based on experimental evidence or theoretical reasoning. There are inquiries about the relationship between torque, force, and distance, as well as the physical meaning behind rotational inertia.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with some participants providing insights into the principle of levers and the necessity of defining torque in a specific way. There is a mix of interpretations regarding the nature of inertia and its mathematical versus physical significance.

Contextual Notes

Some participants mention the challenge of measuring torque without a predefined equation, indicating a potential constraint in the experimental verification of the concept. There is also a distinction made between different types of inertia, which may affect the discussion's focus.

G01
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
2,709
Reaction score
19
We define torque as a quantity that tends to cause rotational acceleration in an object and that:

[tex]\tau = F \cdot d[/tex]

where d is the distance from the center of rotation.

My question is, why was it defined in this way in the first place?

It works, yes, but how did we know it'd work? Is it because toque is directly proportional to both d and f and the proportionality constant was experimentally proven to be 1? I was thinking there was more to it. Can someone please elaborate on this for me?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
G01 said:
We define torque as a quantity that tends to cause rotational acceleration in an object and that:

[tex]\tau = F \cdot d[/tex]

where d is the distance from the center of rotation.

My question is, why was it defined in this way in the first place?

It works, yes, but how did we know it'd work? Is it because toque is directly proportional to both d and f and the proportionality constant was experimentally proven to be 1? I was thinking there was more to it. Can someone please elaborate on this for me?
This also reminds me why rotational inertia is

[tex]\int r^2 dm[/tex]

Is this just a mathematical conclusion or it has physical meaning?:confused:
 
Inertia is a 4th dimensional property. It is just mathematical. B.T.W that is the polar mass moment of inertia, not rotational inertia.

To G01,

it is defined this way because anything that is NOT EXACTLY perpendicular to the body will NOT cause ANY rotation. Therefore, ONLY that definition holds true. You see, it makes no sense to have a need for a proportionality constant. How will it help? If you try to do an experiment to measure the torque, how will you measure the amount of torque? By using your equation you defined torque to be that's how! See my point? You can't just go and measure torque without first saying, this is what I will call torque.

Edit: Well,I guess one way you could verify it is if you put a torque on a wheel, and from that you can measure its angular acceleration, which would be a measurement independent of the definition of torque. From there, you should see values that match your equation, *if* your initial assumption of torque being t=fd was correct.
 
Last edited:
Inertia is a 4th dimensional property.
More precisely, inertia is the 4th moment of a mass distribution.
 
Not to my knowledge, its called the 2nd moment about an axis astronuc. Its a 4th dimensional property. :smile:
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K