Does Angular Momentum Change When We Drop Weights From A Rotating Turntable?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the behavior of angular momentum and angular velocity in a system involving a man on a rotating turntable who drops weights. Participants explore the implications of dropping the weights on the angular velocity of the man and the relationship between torque and angular momentum in rotational dynamics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that the man's angular velocity remains constant while the weights are in free fall because the rotational inertia of the system does not change until the weights hit the ground.
  • Another participant questions the torque exerted by the weights on the man when he drops them, leading to a clarification that there is no net torque acting on the man at that moment.
  • A tangential question is raised regarding the relationship between angular momentum and torque, specifically whether it is valid to take torque with respect to any point on the axis of rotation while maintaining coherence with angular momentum.
  • A later reply agrees with the idea that for a body rotating about an axis of symmetry, the total angular momentum remains the same about any point on that axis, allowing for torque analysis without redefining angular momentum.
  • However, a participant challenges a specific reasoning about angular momentum, clarifying that while the total angular momentum is parallel to the axis, the angular momentum of individual particles is not necessarily aligned with the axis of rotation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express some agreement on the constancy of angular momentum about the axis of symmetry and the compatibility of torque and angular momentum. However, there is disagreement regarding the specifics of angular momentum for individual particles and the implications of dropping the weights.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the assumptions made about the system's behavior when the weights are dropped and the definitions of angular momentum and torque in relation to specific points on the axis of rotation.

breez
Messages
65
Reaction score
0
A man, holding a weight in each hand, stands at the center of a horizontal frictionless rotating turntable. The effect of the weights is to double the rotational inertia of the system. As he is rotating, the man opens his hands and drops the two weights. They fall outside the turntable. What happens to the man's angular velocity?

The answer is that his angular velocity should stay relatively constant. I am confused to why this occurs. This is my reasoning for this:

As the weights are in free fall, they still are roughly same distance from the axis of rotation. Thus I is constant, and hence the nothing in the system changes. Angular velocity is still constant.

However, once the weights fall on the ground, the external friction force exerts a net torque on the weights, stopping them. However, since the system is not closed, the angular momentum need not be conserved, so the man's angular velocity remains unchanged.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Do you have a question? A cleaner way to see the effect of dropping the weights is to ask: What torque is exerted by the weights on the man when he drops them?
 
Oh I see. There is no net torque acting on the man when he drops them.
 
Oh, and on a tangential question about angular momentum...

I was reading about precession of a gyroscope in my physics text and it seems to take the angular momentum with respect to the axis, but the torque with respect to a point on the axis. I know that for torque and angular momentum to be coherent, we should always take both with respect to the same origin. So I am assuming it is reasonable to take torque with respect to any point on the axis of rotation for which the angular momentum of a rigid body in simple rotation is taken in respect to?

This seems to make sense, as in my text, the proof of the relation, ||L_z|| = I\omega, with respect to an arbitrary point on the axis of rotation seems to reduce to the situation of treating the situation as finding L for each particle making up the rigid body, with the point on the axis perpendicular to the particle. Since in simple rotation, the velocity and radius are on the same plane as any differential cross section of the rigid body which the point particle lies on, each individual L must be along the axis, perpendicular to the cross section. That would mean L is independent of any specific point on the axis, but rather only the axis itself. Therefore, as long as torque is taken with respect to a point on the axis, the two quantities are compatible. Is my reasoning correct?
 
Doc Al where are youuuuu
 
I'm here, I'm here. (Sorry for the delayed response.)

If you're saying what I think you're saying, then I agree. Let me rephrase part of what you said. For a body rotating about an axis of symmetry, the total angular momentum of the body is the same about any point on the axis. So, you can analyze torque about any point on that axis without redefining the angular momentum. (I think that's what you meant about the quantities being "compatible".)

So far, so good. But I will pick a nit with this paragraph:
breez said:
This seems to make sense, as in my text, the proof of the relation, ||L_z|| = I\omega, with respect to an arbitrary point on the axis of rotation seems to reduce to the situation of treating the situation as finding L for each particle making up the rigid body, with the point on the axis perpendicular to the particle. Since in simple rotation, the velocity and radius are on the same plane as any differential cross section of the rigid body which the point particle lies on, each individual L must be along the axis, perpendicular to the cross section. That would mean L is independent of any specific point on the axis, but rather only the axis itself. Therefore, as long as torque is taken with respect to a point on the axis, the two quantities are compatible. Is my reasoning correct?
Just to be clear: It is not true that the angular momentum of each individual particle is along the axis of rotation. (Consider \vec{L} = \vec{r} \times \vec{p} applied to a particle of the body. That angular momentum vector is at an angle with respect to the axis of rotation.) It's only the sum of the angular momenta that's parallel to the axis. That's why L = I \omega is only true for symmetric bodies. (But L_z = I \omega always holds.)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
7K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
7K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K