How is a Newton a Unit of force, doesnt include direction

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the nature of the Newton as a unit of force, particularly questioning why it is considered a unit of force when it seemingly only represents magnitude without incorporating direction. Participants explore the implications of force being a vector quantity, which includes both magnitude and direction, and how this relates to the definition and use of the Newton in physics.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion about why the Newton is labeled a unit of force when it appears to represent only the magnitude of force.
  • Others clarify that the Newton is defined as the force needed to accelerate a 1 kg mass at 1 m/s², emphasizing that it is a derived unit.
  • Participants note that while force has both magnitude and direction, the direction is specified separately and is not part of the unit itself.
  • Some argue that direction is inherently unitless and that including it in the unit would complicate the definition of force.
  • A later reply suggests that in practical applications, the direction of force is often taken for granted, leading to discussions focusing primarily on magnitude.
  • Several participants acknowledge that in many problems, the direction of force may be negligible, leading to simplifications in how force is discussed.
  • There is a mention of the common practice in physics to treat force and acceleration as scalars in certain contexts, despite their vector nature.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that the Newton quantifies force in terms of magnitude but express differing views on how direction should be treated in relation to the unit. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of this treatment and the conceptual understanding of force as a vector.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight that while force is fundamentally a vector quantity, in many practical scenarios, the direction may be omitted or understood, leading to potential confusion about the nature of force and its representation in units.

alkaspeltzar
Messages
354
Reaction score
37
If force includes strength/magnitude and direction, then why do we say a Newton or Pound is a unit of force?

Isn't it more a unit of the magnitude of force? Please help. Now that i have been thinking about forces always having direction, this is all confusing me. Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The Newton is a derived unit..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton_(unit )

In 1946, Conférence Générale des Poids et Mesures (CGPM) resolution 2 standardized the unit of force in the MKS system of units to be the amount needed to accelerate 1 kilogram of mass at the rate of 1 metre per second squared. The 9th CGPM, held in 1948, then adopted the name "Newton" for this unit

So the units of force are really kgm/S2
 
Last edited by a moderator:
But why is it still called a unit of force, shouldn't it include direction just as force has direction?

What is confusing me is that Force has magnitude and direction, so where is the direction in the unit? Part of me would think in ordered to be called a unit of a force, it would have to have both as well?

Kinda like a inch is a small unit of distance, mph is a small unit of speed. Therefore a Newton should be a small portion of force...but force is not only the magnitude, that capacity to do the movement but the direction. THis is what is confusing me
 
Last edited:
alkaspeltzar said:
but why is it still called a unit of force, to be unit, shouldn't it include direction just as force has direction? Force has magnitude and direction, so where is the direction in the unit?
The Newton is the unit of force, but of course just the magnitude of force. Direction is specified in other ways, the same for any vector. To fully specify a force, you must give magnitude (with units) as well as direction.
 
Direction is unitless. Somewhat paradoxically, unit vectors are unitless.
 
Doc Al, can you check my understanding?

So what you are saying is that the unit of force, a Newton is the unit used to quantify a force. A Newton is the force required to move a 1kg object 1m/s^2. This just how it is.

Really, to fully describe the force, it also has to have direction, but this is specified with its magnitude separately. Force is fully a magnitude with direction. So for example the force of a car might be "500lbs ~northeast"

But to repeat, the force still must include some unit, something that breakes it down. That would be the Newton. I am probably over thinking this. tell me if this sounds right, thank you
 
How could direction be included in the units? There is no universal "zero direction", not least because the laws of physics appear to be the same in all directions. I suppose it would be possible to define an international "zero direction" from which all vectors were defined but that would certainly complicate more problems than it would solve.
 
alkaspeltzar said:
Doc Al, can you check my understanding?

So what you are saying is that the unit of force, a Newton is the unit used to quantify a force. A Newton is the force required to move a 1kg object 1m/s^2. This just how it is.

Really, to fully describe the force, it also has to have direction, but this is specified with its magnitude separately. Force is fully a magnitude with direction. So for example the force of a car might be "500lbs ~northeast"

But to repeat, the force still must include some unit, something that breakes it down. That would be the Newton. I am probably over thinking this. tell me if this sounds right, thank you

Sounds fine to me. Usually the nature of the problem will suggest a suitable reference direction or the problem question may ask for an answer relative to some reference (eg Give your answer in degrees clockwise from north).

In some cases it helps simplify a problem if you change your frame of reference, solve the problem, then convert it back to the reference requested in the question.
 
Thanks all for the help. It is nice to have piece of mind and feel i understand this again.

I guess what got me is that Force is truly understood as a magnitude and direction. But in so many problems, we are only concerned only with the general load/strength/magntitude of the force. Direction is simply left out or understood.

For example, we might ask to find the force given a mass and an acceleration, but direction is negilable. We end up with an answer like "force is 20 lbs". Part of me started to wonder, where is the direction?

But then i realized it is somewhat taken for granted and really we are only concerned with the general force in the problem, hence the simplification. I guess i never had thought about that, and of course when i did it confused me. Thanks for helping me realize that force really is "magnitude and direction" but many times we talk simply about the magnitude of force as 'the force' too.
 
  • #10
alkaspeltzar said:
Doc Al, can you check my understanding?

So what you are saying is that the unit of force, a Newton is the unit used to quantify a force. A Newton is the force required to move a 1kg object 1m/s^2. This just how it is.

Really, to fully describe the force, it also has to have direction, but this is specified with its magnitude separately. Force is fully a magnitude with direction. So for example the force of a car might be "500lbs ~northeast"

But to repeat, the force still must include some unit, something that breakes it down. That would be the Newton. I am probably over thinking this. tell me if this sounds right, thank you
Makes sense to me. There's nothing wrong with saying that a 1 N (net) force is required to give a 1 kg object an acceleration of 1 m/s^2. Note that no mention of direction is required, because maybe we just don't care. (Acceleration, to be fully specified, also requires a direction. It's just as much a vector as force is.)
 
  • #11
alkaspeltzar said:
Thanks all for the help. It is nice to have piece of mind and feel i understand this again.

I guess what got me is that Force is truly understood as a magnitude and direction. But in so many problems, we are only concerned only with the general load/strength/magntitude of the force. Direction is simply left out or understood.

For example, we might ask to find the force given a mass and an acceleration, but direction is negilable. We end up with an answer like "force is 20 lbs". Part of me started to wonder, where is the direction?

But then i realized it is somewhat taken for granted and really we are only concerned with the general force in the problem, hence the simplification. I guess i never had thought about that, and of course when i did it confused me. Thanks for helping me realize that force really is "magnitude and direction" but many times we talk simply about the magnitude of force as 'the force' too.

Sounds good!

Forces can vary in their strengths (i.e, magnitude), as well as in direction.

It is, as you say, rather common to denote the strength of a force as "force" as well. You'll get used to that.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
  • #12
arildno said:
Sounds good!

Forces can vary in their strengths (i.e, magnitude), as well as in direction.

It is, as you say, rather common to denote the strength of a force as "force" as well. You'll get used to that.

I was wondering why in my physics book it keeps talking about Forces as vectors, showing them as BOLD F, but then as the problem progresses, they simply use an unbold F.

I now understand that strictly speaking, Force like acceleration is a vector, having both a magnitude and direction, but for simplicity(or the mere fact of not caring), we generally work on Force and acceleration more/less as a scalar, because the direction is just understood. Since most of my problems are fairly one-dimension(all in the x or y), we kinda ignore direction and just think about force as "so many LBS or Newtons etc". At least that is what my high school book shows.

Would you agree with this ARILDNO? I take it this is normal practice? So it is like you said, better to get use to it that sometimes when we talk about force, we are being more general, just wanting to know the magnitude/strenght?

Thanks
 
  • #13
I guess that is one more question...why do we take vectors like force and acceleration and simplify them, treating them more scalars and throwing the direction out?

My book is full of problems just like that where the direction is not even spoken off, instead you just assumed...example 'find the acceleration given 5N applied to 5kg object"

The answer is really just magnitude of the acceleration? So is the math. Is this just because you have to starrt small and learn the basics...a lot easier to be general durnign a problem since we are in one dimension, we already know direction but just want the basic acceleration to answer the question? Just curious i guess
 
  • #14
alkaspeltzar said:
I guess that is one more question...why do we take vectors like force and acceleration and simplify them, treating them more scalars and throwing the direction out?
As said, sometimes you just don't care. If you want to find how much torque your car engine needs to generate to give you a certain acceleration, does it matter which direction the acceleration is in?

If you want to find the force needed to push a box across the floor against friction, does it matter which direction you push it? The force and the acceleration are in the same direction so you really don't need to do anything with them.

Now if you are dealing with motion and forces that aren't aligned, it starts to matter more.
 
  • #15
alkaspeltzar said:
If force includes strength/magnitude and direction, then why do we say a Newton or Pound is a unit of force?

Isn't it more a unit of the magnitude of force? Please help. Now that i have been thinking about forces always having direction, this is all confusing me. Thanks

FORCE is a VECTOR quantity. A vector quantity consist of three things basically:

1. Magnitude which is just a POSITIVE number.
2. Direction or sense of a vector: Unit vectors define that.
3. Units: as you can see.

So unit and direction are different constituents of a vector, then why do you even think that we need to mention the direction of vector while defining its unit ?
 
  • #16
arildno said:
Sounds good!

Forces can vary in their strengths (i.e, magnitude), as well as in direction.

It is, as you say, rather common to denote the strength of a force as "force" as well. You'll get used to that.

I see this all the time now. Wish I would have picked up on it earlier
 

Similar threads

High School Newton's third law (equal and opposite force)
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
4K
High School What is the Absolute Value of the Normal force on a block on this wedge?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
High School Inertial Mass vs Gravitational Mass
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
Undergrad Acceleration in Newton's second law
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
High School Newton's 3rd Law interactions with 2nd and 1st Law Partners
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
High School How's it possible to push on systems with 2 parts? (Newton's third law)
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
1K
High School How to characterize a rubber ball moving horizontally and bouncing off of a vertical wall?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Undergrad Is true force just "accepted" if it satisfies Newton law?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
High School Newton’s second law as one complete law
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
High School Rigidity: Number of Newtons Required for a Material
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K