Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Force=mass times acceleration, or time derivative of momentum?

  1. Sep 27, 2005 #1
    Which is more generally corrrect,

    F=ma

    or

    F=dp/dt

    ?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 27, 2005 #2

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Aren't they mathematically equivalent?
     
  4. Sep 27, 2005 #3
    Some particles, such as photons, don't have mass but they still have a momentum. F=ma won't work in these cases.
     
  5. Sep 27, 2005 #4
    Depends on the situation, are you dealing with an impulse, where you need to consider momentum transfer, or a longer duration event, where acceleration acts over a longer time duration. F=ma or F=dp/dt is situational.
     
  6. Sep 28, 2005 #5
    Not in general, if you consider the product rule.
     
  7. Sep 28, 2005 #6

    HallsofIvy

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    F= ma is the same as F= dp/dt only if m is a constant. F= dp/dt is more general.
    (In fact, one can consider "rate of change of momentum" to be the DEFINITION of force.)
     
  8. Sep 28, 2005 #7
    Let = mv. Then

    [tex]F = \frac{dp}{dt}[/tex]

    is a definition of F. F = ma is an equality between the quantities F, m and a when m is constant.

    Incorrectly assuming that F = ma is a definition has gotten people really mixed up when going to relativity.

    Pete
     
  9. Sep 28, 2005 #8
    My question arises from the rocket problem, where the object expends mass.
     
  10. Sep 28, 2005 #9

    arildno

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Hi, Loren:
    The crucial difference between the rocket+remaining fuel system and "normal" systems is that it is an "open" system (or geometric control volume) that loses momentum-carrying particles over time, whereas material systems (or material control volumes) keeps all momentum-carrying particles through all times.

    To take a silly example:
    Have a frictionless table of finite length, and let your system be that part of a book which happens to remain on top of the table, the book sliding along with some constant velocity V.
    As the book gets to the edge, the momentum of your chosen system decreases because the parts of the book that travels beyond the table edge is not within your chosen system.
    That is, material particles leave your observed system and carry their own momentum with themselves. This is called momentum flux.
    But the correspomding decrease of momentum in your system cannot be related to any net force acting upon the material particles remaining in your system!!

    Thus, for open systems, we need to take care of the momentum flux term in order not to get wrong answers.

    It is for this reason that the rocket equation looks somewhat differently than the version of Newton's 2.law for a MATERIAL system.
     
  11. Sep 28, 2005 #10

    arildno

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed


    Just a comment to this:
    Pre-relativistically speaking, your fundamental laws for material systems were those of F=ma and mass conservation, and F=dp/dt was a derived law.
    It is Einstein who deserves the credit for bringing about a more productive conceptual switch.
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2005
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?