Friction and blocks, pulling force resolving

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a physics problem involving friction and pulling forces between blocks, where the user is struggling to match their answer with a textbook solution. The user, a graduate student, initially miscalculated the force due to a misunderstanding of the problem's assumptions. Forum members emphasize the importance of correctly setting up free body diagrams and understanding the problem's nuances. They encourage the user to clarify their approach and seek peer validation rather than relying solely on forum answers. Ultimately, the conversation highlights the learning process in tackling complex physics problems.
caspernorth
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/5831/friction.jpg

The coefficient of friction between surfaces and masses are shown in figure. Here the block M3 is pulled by the force F and for a particular F friction between m2 is twice as that of m1. So what is F? I'm keep getting half the value of correct answer(provided in book), so I won't bias you with the values.
Here g is taken as 10 m/s^2
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
We do need to see what you tried though.
The most likely mistake is how you set up your free body diagrams.
 
Last edited:
Simon Bridge said:
We do need to see what you tried though.
The most likely mistake is how you set up your free body diagrams.

So, can I get an answer?
 
You certainly can.

You don't seem to be getting much joy out of these forums.
Have you read the rules and the help/tutorial-pages on how to get the most out of this place?
The thing to remember here is that we are not an answer mill ... that would be cheating.
It is your homework, you have to do the work - that is how you learn.
 
I think I gave the wrong impression here. This is not a homework, I'm a graduate student as a matter of fact. This was a problem I saw while searching for an equation in an old textbook of mine. I just worked out the problem at my office and got an answer which turns out to be half the provided answer. I made a mistake which they have specially noted separately to be aware of in a small column and i re-did it and got the answer. But that special case they mentioned is quite an uncommon assumption; so I'm not sure of the textbook answer either and that's why I posted it here.
 
You posted in the homework forums so...

So it seems your problem is not that you cannot do it then. The first step to solving a problem is to identify it.
Since you are a grad student, you should understand the approach.

What is it about the textbook problem that gave you pause?
I am sure you have fellow grad students who you can show to see if they get the same answer you did - but that doesn't really help does it? As a grad student you are training to solve problems that nobody knows the answer to... you really need some way to be able to tell when you are right.

Without knowing how you handled the problem, I cannot see how you think, so cannot give a good answer.
 
Last edited:
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top