Geometry Help: Solving Lagrangian Problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter Xyius
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Geometry
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on solving a geometry-related issue within a Lagrangian mechanics context, specifically regarding the relations for x and y in a problem involving a cube rolling on a sphere. The user expresses confusion about deriving the formula for y, which includes terms like (r+b)cos(θ) and rθsin(θ). Clarifications are made about the assumptions regarding the cube's initial position and the implications of rolling without slipping. Ultimately, the user gains understanding and thanks the contributors for their help. The conversation highlights the importance of clear assumptions in geometric problems related to physics.
Xyius
Messages
501
Reaction score
4
This is a Lagrangian problem, I am posting it here in introductory physics because what I need help with isn't in Lagrangian mechanics, but rather geometry.

http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/7504/what3.png

I am confused as how they got those relations for x and y. I have tried to make sense out of it but cannot figure it out. I am sure it is something really simple!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Let's start with y. You can probably understand where the (r+b)cos(θ) comes from I hope. Now imagine that you roll the cube around the sphere by an angle θ. The length of the line CB is then what? That's right! It's rθ. So obviously this adds a height rθsin(θ). Now you have

y = (r+b)cos(θ) + rθsin(θ)
 
Hm. I agree with Xyius; I don't think that, as stated, the formula necessarily holds. Consider a much smaller cube in the same place, at the same angle.

The unstated assumption is that the cube was originally placed square and centered on top of the cylinder and rolled to its current location, but that hasn't been specified.
 
Joffan said:
Hm. I agree with Xyius; I don't think that, as stated, the formula necessarily holds. Consider a much smaller cube in the same place, at the same angle.

A much smaller cube would not be able to get to as large of an angle, because the cube must roll without slipping. The formula is valid.
 
Ah! I understand now! Thank you very much :]
 
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top