How can we prove that the forces acting on a body can form a closed-up

  • Thread starter Thread starter asdff529
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Body Forces Form
AI Thread Summary
Forces acting on a body can form a closed polygon, indicating equilibrium, as a resultant force exists only if they do not. A zero resultant force occurs when the forces create a closed polygon, satisfying the condition for equilibrium. In scenarios with no forces or only two forces, the object can still be in equilibrium, but the vectors won't form a polygon. The two-force case can be visualized as moving along a line and returning along the same line. Ultimately, the sum of the force vectors must equal a zero vector for the object to be in equilibrium.
asdff529
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
How can we prove that the forces acting on a body can form a closed-up polygon?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


If they didn't, then there would be a resultant force. The magnitude of the resultant is zero only if the other forces form a closed polygon. The condition for equilibrium is, of course, no net force
 


If there are no forces or only two forces on the object then that object could be in equilibrium but the force vectors can't be connected to form a polygon.
 


Well you could think of the two forces case as going along a line and back along the same line.

The idea to remember is that the sum of the force vectors is a zero vector for the object in equilibrium.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...
Back
Top