Does rotational kinetic energy affect the height of a ball thrown into the air?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Nick89
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Conceptual
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between rotational kinetic energy and the height a ball reaches when thrown into the air. Participants explore whether rotational energy should be included in energy balance equations and how it affects the ball's motion, considering both translational and rotational dynamics.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant states that the rotational kinetic energy of a ball should be accounted for in energy balance equations, questioning if it leads to a lower height compared to a non-rotating ball.
  • Another participant argues that translational and rotational motions can be treated separately in Newtonian mechanics, suggesting that rotation should not affect the height reached by the ball.
  • A participant raises concerns about how a ball begins to rotate when thrown, noting that without friction, the initial rotation must be imparted at the moment of the throw.
  • One participant asserts that a ball's center of mass will rise to the same height regardless of its spin, emphasizing that gravity does not exert torque on the ball.
  • Another participant suggests that the energy required to initiate the ball's spin must be considered, questioning if this energy is lost during flight.
  • It is noted that once the ball is in flight, gravity is the only acting force, and it does not change the rotational motion since it exerts no torque.
  • A participant introduces an analogy involving the gravitational interaction of massive stars to illustrate the concept of forces acting on a point mass at the center of mass.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether rotational kinetic energy affects the height of the ball. Some argue that it does not influence the height, while others question how the initial conditions of rotation should be factored into the analysis. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the simplification of ignoring air resistance and the need for initial torque to impart rotation. There are also considerations regarding the assumptions made about energy conservation and the separation of translational and rotational motion.

Nick89
Messages
553
Reaction score
0
Hi,

This is probably quite a silly question, someone asked it to me but I have to admit I didn't know what to answer lol...

The question is:

A rotating ball has a rotational kinetic energy of [itex]K_{rot} = 1/2 I \omega^2[/itex], right?
If you throw this ball (while rotating) up into the air, will it reach a smaller height than a ball that is not spinning?

In other words, should you account for this rotational energy if you set up the energy balance? For example:
[tex]\frac{1}{2}mv^2 = mgh[/tex] for a non-rotating ball (no friction) thrown into the air with speed v.

[tex]\frac{1}{2}mv^2 = mgh + \frac{1}{2} I \omega^2[/tex] for a rotating ball?

If we disregard friction with the air I think this does not make sense at all intuitively... Why should a rotating ball reach a smaller height?

Is it because the rotational kinetic energy is just another form of normal kinetic energy and is therefore somehow hidden inside the original equation, maybe?

I'm clueless on this lol... But it doesn't seem like a very hard question at all... I guess I just never studied this properly ^^
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well I may be missing something here, but for Newtonian mechanics translational and rotational motion can be thought of as mathematically separate when describing an objects motion. Therefor unless the rotational motion of the object affects directly the ability to throw an object (disregarding friction) there should be no reason for it the affect the translational parabolic motion of the object.
I think this would especially hold true for an object with regular geometry such as a sphere.

Someone with more expertise should be along shortly to clear this up for sure.
 
You're probably right, but how can this be understood with the energy balances I used as an example?

I think it might also have something to do with the cause of the rotation. How and why would a ball start to rotate when you throw it in the air? Without friction it certainly won't do that...
It will only rotate if you give it an initial rotation together with it's initial velocity, and then the two rotational kinetic energies cancel out maybe?
 
A ball whose center of mass is moving at some velocity will rise to the same height regardless of whether it also spins. (Ignore air resistance for simplicity.) Since gravity does not exert a torque about the center of mass, it cannot affect the rotational motion.

Energy is conserved, like always. It's just that the rotational KE doesn't change.
 
So the answer is that, to get the ball to start spinning you need to add the same amount of energy that the ball loses while spinning, because nothing can change the spinning motion of the ball once it is in flight?
 
To get the ball spinning you must exert a torque on it and give it rotational kinetic energy. Once the ball is in flight the only force acting on it is gravity--we ignore air resistance--then its rotational motion about its center of mass cannot change since gravity exerts no torque on the ball.
 
The force of Gravity acts only on a point mass at an objects geometric center of mass. Think about how two massive stars would orbit each other...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 77 ·
3
Replies
77
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
7K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K