Describe the final position of the weights

  • Thread starter Thread starter matrix_204
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Final Position
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a physics problem involving three weights (3 kg, 4 kg, and 5 kg) attached to strings, which reach equilibrium after being released. Participants express confusion about the question's clarity, particularly regarding whether the weights are in a still position at equilibrium and if there is a trick involved. It is emphasized that if the system is in equilibrium, the weights must indeed be stationary. The conversation suggests that the problem may be vague, but it indicates that the angles of the strings can be calculated based on the given weights. The final position of the weights is expected to be determined by their respective masses and the angles formed by the strings.
matrix_204
Messages
99
Reaction score
0
i don't understand this question, it says, three masses of 3 kg, 4kg, and 5kg, are attached to strings as shown in the diagram. The weights are released and the system reaches equilibrium. Describe the final position of the weights.
If it's in equilibrium, the weights are in a still position right. or is there a trick to this problem.
 

Attachments

  • weights.jpg
    weights.jpg
    3 KB · Views: 473
Physics news on Phys.org
They are asking you for the angles og the string. Think what happened if the weight in the middle was much lighter or much heavier: the string would be almost straight or make a smaller angle, respectively. The given weights are enough information for you to calculate all angles in the diagram.
 
originally posted by ahrkron
The weights are released and the system reaches equilibrium. Describe the final position of the weights.
If it's in equilibrium, the weights are in a still position right. or is there a trick to this problem.
I don't see why you would think there is any trick. If the weights weren't in a "still position", it wouldn't make sense to ask you to find "the final position".
 
IMO, the question is vague after looking at the diagram. As ahrkron pointed out, the only thing one could calculate in the angles.

Doug
 
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