Interpreting the Conservation of Momentum in a Splitting Object Scenario

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on interpreting the conservation of momentum in a scenario where an object splits into two pieces. The initial kinetic energy is defined as k = 1/2mv², and the final kinetic energy before splitting is expressed as (19k/16)mv²₁. Two cases are analyzed: one where m₂ is moving relative to m₁, yielding an incorrect mass of m₂ = 0.097, and another where m₁ is moving relative to m₂, resulting in a plausible mass of m₂ = 10.23. The conversation emphasizes the importance of reference frames and the potential distribution of kinetic energy post-split.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of kinetic energy formulas, specifically k = 1/2mv².
  • Familiarity with momentum conservation principles in physics.
  • Knowledge of reference frames in physics.
  • Basic algebra for solving equations involving mass and velocity.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of reference frames in momentum conservation scenarios.
  • Explore the concept of kinetic energy distribution in splitting objects.
  • Learn about internal versus external forces in energy transformations.
  • Investigate advanced topics in collision physics and energy conservation.
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, educators, and anyone interested in advanced mechanics, particularly those studying momentum conservation and energy distribution in dynamic systems.

SayedD
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
A particle that is moving with velocity ##v## has kinetic energy ##K##. Suddenly the particle gained extra energy externally with magnitude ##3k/16## that causes the particle to split into two pieces. One piece moves at the speed of ##v## relative to the other piece with the direction of motion parallel with the motion before splitting. If the mass of the smaller piece is 1 kg, determine the mass of the other piece.
Relevant Equations
Momentum and Energy
My method is silly but here is my attempt

Initially we know that the kinetic energy is k = ##1/2mv^2## and the final kinetic energy at the moment before splitting is equal to ##(k + 3k/16)mv^2_1 = (19k/16)mv^2_1##. Substituting the value k to the second equation gives us ##v_1 = (\sqrt{19}/4)v##

Since the equation only tells us the relative motion between the pieces, I think we should deal the momentum in the reference frame of that piece. And also notice that ##M = m_1 + m_2## with ##m_1 = 1## This gives us the equation. And there is two cases since we do not know which piece is stationary or moving in this reference frame. So we have to check both case.

Case one, ##m_2## is moving with v relative to other piece.
##(m_1 + m_2)(v_1 - v) = m_2 v
\implies v(1 + m_2)(\sqrt{19}/4 - 1) = m_2 v
\implies m_2 = 0.097 ## which is smaller thus wrong

Case two ##m_1## is moving with v relative to other piece.
##(m_1 + m_2)(v_1 - v) = m_1 v
\implies v(1 + m_2)(\sqrt{19}/4 - 1) = m_1 v
\implies m_2 = 10.23 ## which is bigger thus could right

These all argument could be crap but I wanted to see your solutions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
There is no reason to assume that one piece is stationary after explosion. The final kinetic energy may be split between the two pieces.
 
SayedD said:
Initially we know that the kinetic energy is k = ##1/2mv^2## and the final kinetic energy at the moment before splitting is equal to ##(k + 3k/16)mv^2_1 ##.
No, the energy after splitting is just ##k + 3k/16##.
 
  • Like
Likes nasu
Looking at OP's only previous thread, you can see that @SayedD (OP) never replied to any of the 23 postings made by other PF members.

Let's wait for a reply by OP before making any additional posts to this thread.
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman
SammyS said:
Looking at OP's only previous thread, you can see that @SayedD (OP) never replied to any of the 23 postings made by other PF members.

Let's wait for a reply by OP before making any additional posts to this thread.
Thanks for that heads-up, Sammy. OP has been given a not-so-gentle reminder from me to reply to the threads that he starts. Clock is ticking...
 
  • Like
Likes SammyS
nasu said:
There is no reason to assume that one piece is stationary after explosion. The final kinetic energy may be split between the two pieces.
In a certain reference frame it is right?
 
What reference frame are you using to solve the problem? In what reference frame is the velocity v and the kinetic energy k?
 
I have a question of interpretation. It is clear that the energy "gained externally" is added to the existing ##K##. However, I see no definitive indication that this external energy is added in way that leaves the initial momentum unchanged. I would feel more comfortable about it if there were an internal explosion that added the energy instead of an external force.
 
  • Like
Likes SammyS and nasu

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
905
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
12K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K