How Can I Measure Kinetic Energy in a Non-Inertial Reference Frame?

  • Thread starter Thread starter xkcda
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
To measure kinetic energy in a non-inertial reference frame, the formula K = (Moment of Inertia about an axis through A * Angular Velocity^2)/2 + (Mass * Velocity^2)/2 is proposed, yielding K = 9.5. However, there is ambiguity regarding the reference frame's rotation and the interpretation of "with respect to point A." It is suggested that if the moment of inertia is calculated about the axis of rotation, the linear kinetic energy term may lead to double counting. Observers in the non-inertial frame must consider the rigid body's instantaneous motion as a combination of linear motion and rotation about its mass center. Clarifying these aspects is essential for accurate kinetic energy measurement.
xkcda
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary: I think A is an non inertial reference frame.So how can I measure kinetic energy about it?

I found a solution to the problem which states that Kinetic Energy about A= (Moment of Inertia about an axis passing through A*Angular Velocity^2)/2+(Mass*Velocity^2)/2 .Thus K=9.5.Can anyone please show me the derivation of this formula?
Screenshot from 2023-06-16 00-03-00.png
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
No attempt shown.
 
Please show some effort, so we can help you learn.
 
Moved to homework help.
 
The first difficulty is that "with respect to point A" is ambiguous.
It is reasonable to assume, as you have, that it does not mean the fixed point in space where that corner happens to be at some instant; rather, it moves with that corner of the plate. But that still does not answer whether the reference frame is also rotating with the plate. Consider both cases.
In each case, think of what an observer in the frame would see the plate as doing.
xkcda said:
Kinetic Energy about A= (Moment of Inertia about an axis passing through A*Angular Velocity^2)/2+(Mass*Velocity^2)/2
That seems very unlikely to be right. If you take the moment of inertia about the axis of rotation then you should not need to be adding a linear KE term: that would be double counting. Generally speaking, you can consider the instantaneous motion of a rigid body as the sum of the linear motion of its mass centre and its rotation about its mass centre. So if you have an ##mv^2## term for the linear component then the moment of inertia should be about the mass centre.
 
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 .
Thread 'Correct statement about a reservoir with an outlet pipe'
The answer to this question is statements (ii) and (iv) are correct. (i) This is FALSE because the speed of water in the tap is greater than speed at the water surface (ii) I don't even understand this statement. What does the "seal" part have to do with water flowing out? Won't the water still flow out through the tap until the tank is empty whether the reservoir is sealed or not? (iii) In my opinion, this statement would be correct. Increasing the gravitational potential energy of the...
Thread 'A bead-mass oscillatory system problem'
I can't figure out how to find the velocity of the particle at 37 degrees. Basically the bead moves with velocity towards right let's call it v1. The particle moves with some velocity v2. In frame of the bead, the particle is performing circular motion. So v of particle wrt bead would be perpendicular to the string. But how would I find the velocity of particle in ground frame? I tried using vectors to figure it out and the angle is coming out to be extremely long. One equation is by work...
Back
Top