What is the Significance of Line of Action of Force?

  • Thread starter Thread starter logearav
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Force Line
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on understanding the concept of the line of action of forces in physics. It highlights that forces f2 and f4 are equal and opposite with the same line of action, while f1 and f3 are also equal and opposite but have different lines of action due to their orientation in relation to the magnetic field. The confusion arises from the representation in diagrams, which can mislead the perception of the forces' alignment. Clarifications indicate that both f1 and f3 are indeed perpendicular to the magnetic field, but their depiction varies based on the viewpoint of the diagrams. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the importance of accurately interpreting force diagrams to grasp the concept of lines of action.
logearav
Messages
329
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



http://www.xamidea.in/cbse-examination-guide.aspx?q=3&c=67&t=10000638&info=title

Homework Equations



Dear members,
In this link, forces f2 and f4 are equal and opposite but they have same line of action
forces f1 and f3 are also equal and opposite but they have different line of action.
I don't understand how f1 and f3 have different line of action and f2 and f4 have same line of action, because both in both cases forces are equal and opposite
Please help me understand this concept of line of action of force, revered members

The Attempt at a Solution


 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
The problem I think you have is because the first image is a little confusing since it doesn't give any feeling of 3d space. You must consider both figs and apply the LHR you can see that both F1 and F3 are parallel and both perpendicular to the B field but they are not doth on any single line perpendicular to the B field.They do not act on the same line except when the B field is perpendicular to the plane of the loop.
 
Sir, Thanks for the reply. I got it 80 % now, after re reading your reply. But one more doubt, that is, the second diagram shows F1 and F3 in upward and downward directions but in the first diagram, they are projecting outward to the sides of the loop. Why such a difference between the first and second diagram.
 

Attachments

  • image083.jpg
    image083.jpg
    8.2 KB · Views: 562
  • image084.jpg
    image084.jpg
    9 KB · Views: 603
"but they are not DOTH on any single line perpendicular to the B field.They do not act on the same line except when the B field is perpendicular to the plane of the loop."

I don't understand this line of your reply sir. What do u mean by DOTH?
 
logearav said:
Sir, Thanks for the reply. I got it 80 % now, after re reading your reply. But one more doubt, that is, the second diagram shows F1 and F3 in upward and downward directions but in the first diagram, they are projecting outward to the sides of the loop. Why such a difference between the first and second diagram.

There isn't any difference. The first diagram shows you the loop from the side of the loop ,you are looking towards the yz plane. The second shows you the loop at the same time from above ,you are looking at the xy plane. The problem is that the first diagram makes F1 and F3 look like they are not perpendicular to the B field. This is not what happens, the forces are always perpendicular to the B field and the current.It is just a bad diagram with no axes. .

logearav said:
What do u mean by DOTH.
Sorry it was a typo,I meant "BOTH".
 
Thanks a lot sir. What a beautiful explanation! I wonder why my physics teacher does not know all these things. Thanks again sir.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...

Similar threads

Back
Top