How a rotational motion could be in an inertial ref. frame

AI Thread Summary
Rotational motion inherently involves radial acceleration, necessitating the use of non-inertial reference frames. While it is possible to analyze rotational movement in an inertial frame, confusion arises regarding when to apply each type of frame. Practicing analysis from both reference frames helps clarify their differences, particularly in how acceleration is defined. In non-inertial frames, the relationship between position derivatives and forces diverges from Newton's laws, requiring the introduction of inertial forces to maintain consistency. Understanding these distinctions is crucial for accurate calculations in rotational dynamics.
albertov123
Messages
21
Reaction score
1
When rotation exists, so does the radial acceleration. It can be defined as ar=-ω2xr

So there is a kind of acceleration with rotation all the time. Thus, we have to use non-inertial reference frame all the time.

Could a rotational movement be analysed in an inertial ref. frame?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are confusing the motion of the physical bodies with the motion of the reference frame.
 
  • Like
Likes Nosebgr and albertov123
Oh, you are saying that a rotational motion could be considered in an inertial ref. frame.

Then, let me dive into my source of confusion. We are learning reference frames and when I see a rectilinear acceleration, I understand there is a non-inertial reference frame also accelerating with the physical body. But I'm not clear on when to use inertial or non-inertial in the rotational cases.

Can you give me an example?
 
Albertov123 said:
But I'm not clear on when to use inertial or non-inertial in the rotational cases.
For practice, you should analyse it from both reference frames to learn the difference. This will help you to pick the most convenient one later on.
 
The first thing to consider about a rotating reference frame is that the second derivative of position is no longer the same as acceleration due to a force. In an inertial reference frame they are the same but not in a rotating reference frame. Suppose you are traveling North in a car at 50 mph, but want to use a rotating reference frame to measure velocities and acceleration. Suppose the rotating frame does a full rotation in 4 minutes. Initially you measure the velocity in one axis as 50 mph. One minute later, you measure the velocity in the other axis as 50 mph and the first axis has gone to 0 mph. So there are large velocity derivatives in the rotating frame. All with no force applied. In the rotating reference frame, you must account for the rotation to convert derivatives to true accelerations due to forces. And the difference between the two can easily be large.
 
  • Like
Likes albertov123
FactChecker said:
The first thing to consider about a rotating reference frame is that the second derivative of position is no longer the same as acceleration due to a force.
More generally: In non-inertial frames the second derivative of position (coordinate acceleration) times mass is not always equal to the sum of interaction forces (those which obey Newtons 3rd Law). One way of dealing with this, is to introduce inertial forces (which don't obey Newtons 3rd Law), to make at least Newton's 2nd Law work.
 
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...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
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?
Back
Top