Is the force for centripetal acceleration inversely proportional to the radius?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between centripetal force and radius in the context of centripetal acceleration, exploring whether the force is inversely proportional to the radius. Participants examine different formulas for centripetal force and the implications of varying parameters such as velocity and angular velocity.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that since F=mv²/r, the force required for centripetal acceleration is inversely proportional to the radius, suggesting that a larger radius would require less force if velocity is constant.
  • Others question the interpretation of "v" in the equation, prompting a discussion about its dependence on radius and angular velocity.
  • One participant notes that if angular velocity (ω) is constant, the relationship changes, and they suggest expressing centripetal force in terms of ω.
  • Another participant presents two formulas for centripetal acceleration, arguing that the first formula (F=mv²/r) implies that as radius increases, the force decreases if speed is held constant, while the second formula (F=mω²r) indicates that force increases with radius when angular speed is constant.
  • Some participants challenge the assumption that v²/r remains constant, asking for clarification on the conditions under which this holds true.
  • A participant attempts to reconcile the differing interpretations by explaining that the force can either increase or decrease with radius depending on which variable (speed or angular speed) is held constant.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the relationship between centripetal force and radius. Multiple competing views remain regarding the conditions under which force increases or decreases with radius.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on whether speed or angular speed is held constant, which affects the interpretation of the relationship between force and radius. The discussion also highlights the need for clarity on the definitions and assumptions related to velocity.

avito009
Messages
184
Reaction score
4
Since F=mv2/r. Does that mean the force required for centripetal acceleration is inversely proportional to the radius? If radius is more the lesser centripetal force is required, is this correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
avito009 said:
F=mv2/r
What's "v2?"
 
avito009 said:
radius is more the lesser centripetal force is required, is this correct?
That's if v is constant,
In most situations, ##\omega##(angular velocity) is constant, so try expressing centripetal force in terms of ##\omega##
 
Now there are 2 formulas for centripetal acceleration. 1. F= mv2/r. So in this formula we know that as radius increases the speed or velocity increases. So the term v2/r remains constant. So how can we prove from this formula that the Centripetal force is more if the radius is more.

But if we take the formula 2. F=mω2r. we can easily prove that as the radius increases the Centripetal force required increases. But this inference can't be derived from the first formula.
 
avito009 said:
v2/r remains constant
Think again. What is "v?"
 
avito009 said:
F= mv2/r. So in this formula we know that as radius increases the speed or velocity increases
That would be if F is a constant.
Can you specify a situation!
 
Bystander said:
Think again. What is "v?"
V is the velocity. But I didnt understand your point.
 
What is "v" in terms of "r?"
 
Bystander said:
What is "v" in terms of "r?"
V is velocity which is distance/time. So you mean to say that the distance or the radius in this case is more so the velocity is more at the edge. So the Centripetal Force is more. Is this what you meant to tell me?
 
  • #10
In your original question, you've ignored the fact that v equals omega times r and when looking at the dependence of centripetal acceleration on r.
avito009 said:
mv2/r
avito009 said:
inversely proportional to the radius?
 
  • #11
avito009 said:
Now there are 2 formulas for centripetal acceleration. 1. F= mv2/r. So in this formula we know that as radius increases the speed or velocity increases. So the term v2/r remains constant. So how can we prove from this formula that the Centripetal force is more if the radius is more.

But if we take the formula 2. F=mω2r. we can easily prove that as the radius increases the Centripetal force required increases. But this inference can't be derived from the first formula.

I'm tryng to interpret the law: in the first equation the force, that deviate the particle along the orbit, increases together with the speed if we fix the radius, and it decreases together with the radius if we fix the speed.
In the second equation the force increases togheter with the radius, because fixing the angolar speed and increasing the radius, the speed (not explicit here) must increase and then also the force.
 
  • #12
I said badly "it decreases together with the radius" but I would say "the force decreases when the radius increases in the first equation" (if we fix the speed).

I hope that I can convince you there isn't a paradox about the force vs radius that sometime it increases, and sometime it decreases: it's enough that you fix one of the indipendent variabiles and then you'll se how the force changes when at the same time also the other variabile changes.

In other words, if we fix the angular speed, we know that the periferic speed increases when the radius increases and so the force. But if we fix the periferic speed, the angular speed decreases if the radius increases and then the force decreases.

I'm italian and I don't use to write in english but if I see anything that it's named physics it may be that I could try to speak japanese too.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Suraj M

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
847