How does conservation of geometry apply to levers in equilibrium?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the conservation principles related to levers in equilibrium, highlighting two key equations. The first equation, |F + εD| = const, represents the conservation of force, indicating that the sum of the current force and the force associated with distance remains constant for each particle in the lever, reflecting conservation of potentials. The second equation, |D + λF| = const, denotes the conservation of distance, asserting that the sum of distance and the distance related to force is also constant, which is described as conservation of punctuations. Additionally, the conversation emphasizes that circular geometry, specifically variational conic sections perpendicular to the axis of the cone, is preserved in a lever, remaining invariant regardless of the lever's motion over time. Energy is also noted as a physical quantity that remains invariant with respect to time.
deda
Messages
182
Reaction score
0
The conservation of geometry for lever in equilibrium has two parts:

|F + \epsilon D| = const that is conservation of force which reads: “For every particle in the lever the absolute value of the sum of its current force and the force stored in its distance must be the same”. In other words it’s conservation of potentials.

|D + \lambda F| = const that is conservation of distance which reads: “For every particle in the lever the absolute value of the sum of its distance and the distance stored in its force must be the same”. In other words it’s conservation of punctuations.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Circular geometry (variational conic sections perpendicular to the axis of the cone) is conserved in a level. This geometry is invariant of the motion of the level at any time period.

The other physical quantity that is also an invariance with respect to time is energy.
 
Last edited:
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top