Expression for time period of simple pendulum

Thread starter anigeo
Start date Dec 24, 2011
Tags

Expression Pendulum Period Simple pendulum Time Time period

AI Thread Summary

The discussion centers on the two expressions for the time period of a simple pendulum: t = 2π√(l/g) and t = 2π√(1/T/m). The first expression, which relates the time period to the length of the pendulum and gravitational acceleration, is deemed more useful. The second expression incorrectly incorporates mass and time period, leading to confusion. It is clarified that gravitational force and pseudo centrifugal force are not equivalent, emphasizing the importance of the correct formula. Ultimately, the consensus is that the first expression is the appropriate choice for calculating the time period of a simple pendulum.

Dec 24, 2011

anigeo

Which of the two is a better expression for the time period of a simple pendulum?
t-=2∏\sqrt{(l/g)} or t=2∏\sqrt{(1/T/m)} ; l=length of the pendulum
T=time period of the pendulum
m=mass of bob
Note:g is not equal to T/m as there is pseudo centrifugal force such that T + centripetal force=mg

Physics news on Phys.org

Dec 25, 2011

Thaakisfox

The first one is the useful expression...

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...

View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?

View full post »

Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...

View full post »