I don't quite get Newton's third law

AI Thread Summary
Newton's third law states that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction, which applies to two interacting objects. This means that when a force is exerted on one object, the second object exerts an equal force in the opposite direction on the first object. Confusion arises when considering forces acting on a single object, as the third law pairs act on different bodies, not canceling each other out. For example, when a hand pushes a box, the box pushes back on the hand with an equal force, but this does not negate the net force acting on the box that causes it to accelerate. Understanding this distinction clarifies that the forces acting on an object can lead to acceleration, while the third law describes interactions between different objects.
physgirl
Messages
99
Reaction score
0
i don't quite get Newton's third law... :(

It sounds simple enough, F12 = -F21. However, I'm getting that mixed up with the second law now (ie. if there is a net F on the system, there will be acceleration).

For instance, say that there's a box, and the "F" vector is pointing to the right. However, there's another force (say, F2) pointing to the left. If F is greater than F2, then the box will accelerate to the right according to F-F2=ma. Correct?

But... doesn't the Third law say that for any force acting on this box, there's always another "force" (opposite in sign, equal in magnitude) ALSO acting on the box? As in... in the above scenario, there's -F acting upon the box to counter F, and -F2 acting upon the box to counter F2... This confuses me, because this is implying that there's no net force on the system right? Because by the Third law, there's some force (-F21) canceling out the force in interest (F12)?!

Where's my misunderstanding coming from?

Thanks in advance for any input :)
 
Science news on Phys.org


physgirl said:
But... doesn't the Third law say that for any force acting on this box, there's always another "force" (opposite in sign, equal in magnitude) ALSO acting on the box?

Here is the confusion. Newton's 3rd law describes in the simplest case, two objects in contact with each other will exert equal and opposite forces on each other. For example, if the force F on your box is caused by your hand pushing the box to the right, then there will be an equal force from the box pushing on your hand (not the box) to the left.
 


Newton's third law takes into account the reaction force related to acceleration of an object. This reaction force does not cancel out the force that is causing the acceleration, it's just a reaction to the acceleration caused by a force.
 


physgirl said:
IBut... doesn't the Third law say that for any force acting on this box, there's always another "force" (opposite in sign, equal in magnitude) ALSO acting on the box?
Piling on Dylan's response, the third law counterpart to a force always acts on some other body. Moreover, third law pairs are always the same kind of force. For example, the Earth exerts a gravitational force on the Moon, and the Moon exerts an equal but opposite gravitational force on the Earth.

A more complicated example: Think of a sled sitting the ground. The forces acting on the sled are gravity (downward) and the normal force (upward). The net force acting on the sled is zero1[/color] as the sled isn't moving. This does not mean that gravity and the normal force are third law counterparts. Both forces act on the sled and the two forces are different kinds of forces. One is gravitational and the other is electrostatic repulsion. The third law counterparts of these forces are the gravitational force and electrostatic repulsion exerted by the sled on the Earth. This example can be made even more complex by adding a person pulling a sled with a rope. There are *lots* of third law pairs here.------------------------

1[/color]From an inertial perspective, the sled is moving; it is sitting still on the rotating Earth. The sled undergoes uniform circular motion about the Earth's rotation axis. The gravitational and normal forces on the sled are neither equal in magnitude nor opposite in direction. The vector sum of the normal and gravitational force do not quite cancel.
 


the third law confusion.. well .. it can be explained like this... the force and the reaction which describe in the third law are acting on different objects.. one force act on the box and the other act on the the hand.. both are same and opposite in direction.. if you take the box alone only one force acts on it.. the reaction of that force acts on the hand.. so to the box apply F=ma then you can have one unbalanced 'F', hence the acceleraion by that force..

Another thing.. say you draw a box which is in stable on a table and you are marking the forces.. then probably you will mark 'mg' downwards and the reaction to the upward by the table.. but never get mixed up, those are not the force and the corresponding reaction which Newton says in his third law..the reaction for the 'mg' is unmarked force at the Earth's center of gravity which acts upwards.. and the 'reaction' for the 'reaction force' which acts from the table on the box, is the force which acts downwards and acts on the table from the box.. mmm. i think you better sketch this using four forces.. (you will have to draw the Earth's center too)
 
I was watching a Khan Academy video on entropy called: Reconciling thermodynamic and state definitions of entropy. So in the video it says: Let's say I have a container. And in that container, I have gas particles and they're bouncing around like gas particles tend to do, creating some pressure on the container of a certain volume. And let's say I have n particles. Now, each of these particles could be in x different states. Now, if each of them can be in x different states, how many total...
Thread 'Why work is PdV and not (P+dP)dV in an isothermal process?'
Let's say we have a cylinder of volume V1 with a frictionless movable piston and some gas trapped inside with pressure P1 and temperature T1. On top of the piston lay some small pebbles that add weight and essentially create the pressure P1. Also the system is inside a reservoir of water that keeps its temperature constant at T1. The system is in equilibrium at V1, P1, T1. Now let's say i put another very small pebble on top of the piston (0,00001kg) and after some seconds the system...
I need to calculate the amount of water condensed from a DX cooling coil per hour given the size of the expansion coil (the total condensing surface area), the incoming air temperature, the amount of air flow from the fan, the BTU capacity of the compressor and the incoming air humidity. There are lots of condenser calculators around but they all need the air flow and incoming and outgoing humidity and then give a total volume of condensed water but I need more than that. The size of the...

Similar threads

Back
Top