Is my use of ##e_x## in my solution for Fluids Angular Momentum correct?

member 428835
I don't typically do this, but attached is a figure with a problem statement. This is not homework because I have already solved it! My question is a subtle one.
Please see the attachments, one is the question and the other is my solution.

I know my solution is correct, but at the end of equation (2) I wrote ##n = e_x## where ##e_x## is the unit vector in the ##x## direction. At the time I am not sure why I wrote ##e_x## this way, because I now think it should be ##\cos \theta e_x + \sin \theta e_y##. Any help here would be awesome in understanding why what I had was correct.

Thanks so much.
 

Attachments

  • solution.png
    solution.png
    82.3 KB · Views: 585
  • problem.png
    problem.png
    68.3 KB · Views: 680
  • Like
Likes Bibleman
Physics news on Phys.org
I am not going to try to follow your intricate algebra, but I will suggest an easier way. Take moments about the sprinkler's axis and apply conservation of angular momentum. What is the tangential velocity of the jet in the ground frame?
 
Tangential velocity is ##-r \omega + Q \cos \theta / 3 A##.

I think I know how to solve the problem assuming velocity out of the sprinkler pipe is constant (or rather averaged), but I want to make sure I can do it both ways (the way you mention above and using integrals).

Thanks for the reply
 
  • Like
Likes Bibleman
Never mind, I figured it out. For others, in case they want to know, I'll attach the solution.
 

Attachments

  • Like
Likes Bibleman
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top