Linear momentum and angular momentum

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between linear momentum and angular momentum, particularly in the context of a billiard ball colliding with a cushion. Participants explore whether linear momentum can be converted into angular momentum and vice versa, and how conservation laws apply in such scenarios.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that linear momentum can be expressed as angular momentum and both are conserved individually, suggesting that it may be easier to analyze one at a time.
  • Others express confusion about the source of increased linear momentum after a collision, questioning how conservation laws apply if one form of momentum can transform into another.
  • A participant suggests that the interaction between the billiard ball and the cushion involves an exchange of linear and angular momentum with the table and ground, which may not be immediately apparent due to mass differences.
  • One participant attempts to analyze the situation mathematically, proposing that angular momentum could be transformed into linear momentum, leading to a discussion about the implications of such a transformation.
  • Another participant corrects earlier claims, asserting that the conservation of linear and angular momentum are independent and that predicting the ball's movement requires considering kinetic energy.
  • There is a question about whether a portion of angular momentum can be said to change into linear momentum in the context of kinetic energy transformations during the collision.
  • A later reply introduces a different scenario involving kinetic energy and potential energy, suggesting a broader context for understanding momentum transformations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether linear momentum can be converted into angular momentum or how conservation laws apply in this context. Multiple competing views remain, with some participants asserting independence of the two forms of momentum while others explore potential transformations.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the assumptions underlying their arguments, particularly in relation to the conservation laws and the mathematical relationships between linear and angular momentum. There are unresolved mathematical steps and dependencies on definitions that affect the discussion.

celestra
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
We see a lot of examples of converting between linear motion and angular motion in our daily life.
But, is the conversion between linear momentum and angular momentum possible?
If so, where have the conservation law of linear momentum and the conservation law of angular momentum gone?
If not so, how can I understand the phenomenon such as this.
A billiard ball that has high angular velocity and low linear velocity is collide with the cushion and bounce off with low angular velocity and high linear velocity.
Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Looks like you haven't actually solved enough textbook problems. Basically, linear momentum can be expressed as angular momentum, and vice versa, and so both are always conserved individually.. it just makes problems easier sometimes if you consider just one first, and the other later.
 
Thank you for your reply. But, I'm still in confusion. Where exactly originated the increased linear momentum of the billiard ball from? If it's from the angular momentum of the ball before the collision, then each conservations doesn't seem to work to me. If one of linear momentum(p) and angular momentum(L) can be converted into the other one according to L = r x p, then I think they cannot be conserved individually. Where did I mistake?
 
Regards your question, the billiard ball exerts a force on the cushion. This exchanges linear and angular momentum with the table (and ground), which you didn't notice because the ball has a much smaller mass.
 
L = angular momentum
P = linear momentum
b = ball
t = table
1 = before collision
2 = after collision
And let's try scalar form only instead of vectors.
Then,
Lb1 + Lt1 = Lb2 + Lt2
Pb1 + Pt1 = Pb2 + Pt2
According to the condition of the above problem,
Lt1 = Pt1 = 0
Lb1 > Lb2
Pb1 < Pb2
Then,
Lb1 - Lb2 = Lt2 > 0 (Surely, this must have been consumed by the cushion as it has been twisted)
But,
Pb1 - Pb2 = Pt2 < 0 (Again, this is magnitude only! It's not related with direction. And this must be supplied from somewhere, not consumed)
My question is if I can consider that the Pt2 is transformed from Lt2. If I can do so, it seems that angular momentum CAN be converted into linear momentum. And it sounds somewhat weird.
 
You've made more mistakes there. Your first two inequalities are the wrong way around. (Consequently, Lt2 should be negative, and Pt2 +ve. Absolutely no idea what you meant by "consumed".) No you cannot consider Pt2 transformed from Lt2, as I stated previously.

It shouldn't be surprising. The effect occurs where the spinning ball starts exerting a frictional force on the surrounds. Newton's 3rd law states that the force and momentum imparted on the surrounds is equal and opposite to the force and additional momentum that friction simultaneously imparts on the ball, always giving zero change in (any form of) total momentum. You might say rotational kinetic energy is converted to translational kinetic energy.

By the way, welcome to PF :smile:
 
Thank you for your correction.
Lt2 = Lb2 - Lb1 < 0
Pt2 = Pb1 + Pb2 > 0
Now I accept from your explanation that above two relations are totally independent from each other. So, one of them cannot influence the other. And I understand that I cannot predict the movement of the ball unless considering the kinetic energy. Am I right?
Thanks a lot.
 
I think I had another mistake in the above mention. Let me ask the final question that IF I MAY SAY that some portion of the angular momentum(L) was CHANGED to linear momentum(p) according to the relation L=rxp(where r is the radius of the ball), AS I CAN SAY that some portion of the angular kinetic energy was CHANGED to linear kinetic energy in the above problem?
 
I you have a ball flying though space it will have 100% KE but if it hits and connects to a bar that's on a stable axis then it will slow down some because some of the KE will transfer to the spring tension of the molocules in the bar and it will be PE. I guess you could say that the PE is actually KE in the swivel of the planet that the axis is connected too.

Lorentz Law is very interesting because if the charge turns then it should also slow down a little bit.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K