Is the Graph of Period vs. Radius in Circular Motion a Straight Line or a Curve?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between the period (T) and radius (R) in uniform circular motion, specifically whether the graph of T vs. R should be a straight line or a curve. The user has plotted log-Period vs. log-Radius, which resulted in a straight line, suggesting a potential curve for the T vs. R graph. However, the user’s data points appear to favor a straight line, leading to confusion about the expected relationship. The experiment involves a rubber stopper on a string, and the user notes that if the centripetal force remains constant, it could imply a direct relationship between T and R. Ultimately, the user is seeking clarity on the theoretical expectations for the graph based on their experimental findings.
JohnSimpson
Messages
89
Reaction score
0
Hi, I've recently done a lab where we are investigating circular motion. I've plotted a graph of Period vs. Radius, but I'm unable to tell if a straight line or some sort of curve would be better suited to the graph.

I've also plotted log-Period vs. log-Radius and it was a straight line which makes me think that the graph of T vs. R should be a curve, but when I look at my (possibly very flawed) data points a straight line seems better suited.

In short, my question is, is the graph of Period vs. Radius for uniform circular motion a straight line or a curve?

Edit: Forgot to mention this is the ol' rubber stopper on the end of a string and your swinging the whole thing around by holding onto a glass tube, with the weight being on the other end of the string)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
HINT: Given that the centripetal force is the same in all cases, what is the relationship between T and R?
 
I wish I knew.
 
What would you conclude if \omega^2 r is a constant?
 
We havn't been told any equations so I have no idea what that means
 
I'm fairly sure that if the experiment went according to theory, the graph would be a straight line.

I'm saying this because we did a lab like this, and all of our graphs were supposed to be straight lines to show a direct relationship.
 
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