How is the moment of inertia related to the square of the distance?

AI Thread Summary
The moment of inertia (I) is defined by the equation I = MR², indicating that it is directly proportional to both mass (M) and the square of the distance (R) from the axis of rotation. An increase in mass results in greater inertia, while a decrease leads to less inertia, provided the distance remains constant. The relationship to the square of the distance arises because the torque needed to achieve a certain rotational acceleration increases with the distance of the mass from the axis. This means that the further the mass is from the axis, the more difficult it is to rotate the object. Understanding this relationship is crucial for analyzing rotational dynamics.
Hardik Batra
Messages
130
Reaction score
5
Moment of inertia is
I = MR2
object has more mass means more inertia and less mass means less inertia.
That means moment of inertia is directly proportional to mass.
But how the moment of inertia is directly proportional to the square of the distance.?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hardik Batra said:
Moment of inertia is
I = MR2
For a point mass, not in general.

Hardik Batra said:
object has more mass means more inertia and less mass means less inertia.
OK.

Hardik Batra said:
That means moment of inertia is directly proportional to mass.
Only if the distance to the axis--the R--is fixed.

Hardik Batra said:
But how the moment of inertia is directly proportional to the square of the distance.?
It's a measure of the torque required to produce a given rotational acceleration. Loosely: The further the mass is from the axis, the harder it is to get it to rotate.
 
but why it is square of the distance rather than only distance.
 
Thanks. It helpful for me.
 
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...
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?
Let there be a person in a not yet optimally designed sled at h meters in height. Let this sled free fall but user can steer by tilting their body weight in the sled or by optimal sled shape design point it in some horizontal direction where it is wanted to go - in any horizontal direction but once picked fixed. How to calculate horizontal distance d achievable as function of height h. Thus what is f(h) = d. Put another way, imagine a helicopter rises to a height h, but then shuts off all...
Back
Top