Ice Surfing: Solving the Physics of Motion

AI Thread Summary
A small boy jumps onto one end of a plank on a frozen pond, raising questions about the plank's motion due to the lack of friction. The discussion focuses on calculating the center of mass, moment of inertia, and using conservation of momentum to determine the plank's movement after the boy lands. There is confusion regarding the initial angle of the plank and its effect on rotation, with some suggesting that if the boy's trajectory is perpendicular to the plank, it may not move at all. The conversation emphasizes the need to consider three-dimensional motion to fully understand the dynamics involved. Ultimately, the physics of this scenario highlights the complexities of motion on frictionless surfaces.
Chileboy
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Ice surfing!

Hi, this is the problem:

A small boy places a plank of wood on a frozen pond and then, taking a run up, jumps onto one end of the plank. If the plank is perpendicular to the boys trajectory and there is no friction between the plank and the ice, How will the plank move after the boy has landed on it?

This is what I was thinking of doing:
-Calculate the center of mass
-Calculate the moment of inertia (rotating around the center of mass)
-Calculate the speed using conservation of momentum ( mVo = (m+M)V ).
-Equal the boys initial kinetic energy to the final kinetic energy (using V calculated earlier) plus the rotational energy and then finding the systems angular speed.

The problem is that this obviously flawed thinking doesn't take into account the fact that the plank is at a certain angle initially, and intuitively I can see that if the plank were parallel to the boys trajectory it wouldn't rotate at all, so i am obviously missing something.

I'd appreciate any help :biggrin:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If the trajectory is perpendicular to the plank, wouldn't the velocity of the boy be perpendicular to the plank (and the surface of the ice)? Which means the force on the plank will be perpendicular to the surface and so the plank won't move at all. (Except through the ice maybe).
 
Galileo: Think in three dimensions!
 
Last edited:
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top