Newton 2nd law + frame of reference

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around understanding the application of Newton's second law in a scenario with two blocks, one on top of the other, experiencing friction. The key point is that while the upper block does not slide on the lower block when the force F is less than or equal to the maximum static friction f_s(max), this condition is viewed from the frame of reference of the lower block. Observing from the ground, both blocks are accelerating, indicating a net force must be present, which complicates the analysis if only considering F = f_s. The correct approach is to use either the inertial frame of the ground, applying Newton's laws directly, or the accelerating frame of the lower block, which requires accounting for an inertial force on the top block. Ultimately, understanding the frame of reference is crucial for correctly applying the laws of motion in this context.
fisico30
Messages
362
Reaction score
0
hello forum,

i am struggling with the conceptual understanding of this problem:
Given two blocks, one on top of the other. There is friction between the two blocks.
The upper block is pulled with a force F. Thanks to friction, as long as F is smaller or equal to the static friction f_s(max) the objects will move, accelerate together, withouth having the top block slide over the lower block...

The free-body diagram of the top block involves only two forces in the horizontal direction: F and f_s. F=f_s for the top block not to slide while being pulled.

But that seems from the frame of reference of the lower block...

If we are observing the situation from the ground, the top (and bottom) block is accelerating, moving, so a net force need to be there...

The upper block is not moving relative to the lower block (relative velocity=0).

What is the correct frame of reference to use? I would say the one fixed with the ground (because inertial). But that would imply a net force on the top block, while we just have

F=f_s

thanks
fisico30
 
Physics news on Phys.org
fisico30 said:
The free-body diagram of the top block involves only two forces in the horizontal direction: F and f_s.
That's true.
F=f_s for the top block not to slide while being pulled.
That's not true.

But that seems from the frame of reference of the lower block...

If we are observing the situation from the ground, the top (and bottom) block is accelerating, moving, so a net force need to be there...
Absolutely.

The upper block is not moving relative to the lower block (relative velocity=0).

What is the correct frame of reference to use? I would say the one fixed with the ground (because inertial). But that would imply a net force on the top block, while we just have

F=f_s
You can use either frame to analyze this problem. To use the inertial frame of the ground, just apply Newton's 2nd law as usual to both blocks.

But if you want to use the accelerating frame of the bottom block, then you'll have to modify Newton's laws to include an inertial force acting on the top block. The sum of all forces--including the inertial force--must add to zero. That's a bit different from saying F = f_s (which isn't true).
 
  • Like
Likes gracy
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top