Need Help with Newton's equation and circular motion

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around proving the linear independence of the vectors t(t) and n(t) in the context of circular motion. It is established that the dot product being zero indicates orthogonality, which implies linear independence, but a more formal proof is suggested. The second point raises confusion about demonstrating that angular velocity ω is a real number, with no clear method provided in the original context. The third point questions whether all angular velocities can indicate a circular orbit, highlighting the need for additional clarification on the equations involved. Overall, the thread seeks assistance in understanding these concepts and proofs related to Newton's equations and circular motion.
JPTM
Messages
1
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



1. Proof that the vectors \vec{t}(t) = cos(ω(t)), sin(ω(t)) and \vec{n}(t) = -sin(ω(t)), cos(ω(t)) are linearly independant

2. Proof that ω = ω\in\mathbb R

3. Can all angular velocities indicate a possible circular orbit? If so, proof it, if not which angular velocities do?

-ω is the angular velocity
-The movement starts at (r,0)
-We don't use r = 0

Homework Equations



We have 3 given equations:

F(t) = μ\vec{r''}(t) = - \dfrac{k}{(r(t))^3}\vec{r}(t)

Which can be rewritten as:

\vec{r''}(t) = \dfrac{f(r(t))}{μr(t)}\vec{r}(t)

Also the equation of our circular motion is:

\vec{r}(t) = r(cos(ω(t)), sin(ω(t)))

The Attempt at a Solution



1. Can simply be proven by calculating the dot product of t(t) and n(t) which = 0 which means that they have to be linearly independant

2. This is the one I'm stuck at, I've never had any exercise or read something about how you could proof that something is a real number

3. I think I need 2. for this one

Help would be grately appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
With order...

Pay attention that in point 1) you are simply proving, showing that the dot product is zero, that the vectors are perpendicular. You have to prove that they are linearly independent though, which I don't think in general is the same thing. Use the definition of linearly independent vectors and show that indeed the combination ##a\vec{t}+b\vec{n}=0## if and only if ##a## and ##b## are both zero (it is easily done). If it happens then indeed they will be linearly independent.

As for point 2), I do not understand what is the meaning of such a question. In general the argument of a sine or cosine is real, so you should have some condition to satisfy for this not to happen. And I also do not understand the meaning of the third question as well... could you give some more information about this?? Also perhaps specifying what the equations you have are??
 
Orthogonality always implies linear independence, so I think the proof of #1 is OK.

The other questions are indeed puzzling.
 
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...
Back
Top