Newton's Third as logical device to make sense of 1st two laws

  • Thread starter Thread starter \Ron
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Device Laws
AI Thread Summary
Newton's third law is presented as a logical necessity for understanding the first two laws of motion, particularly in the context of an object at rest or moving with constant velocity. The discussion highlights that if an object is completely isolated, the second law would lack meaning, as it relies on the existence of a force acting on the object. The third law asserts that every action has an equal and opposite reaction, which implies that a force must exist to initiate motion. This leads to the conclusion that the presence of a reacting force is not merely a possibility but a logical requirement for the coherence of Newton's laws. Understanding this relationship is crucial for grasping the fundamental principles of mechanics.
\Ron
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
In Introduction to Mechanics by Kleppner, the section on Newton's third law says that the third law is not only a physical principle but is also a logical necessity for the first two laws to make sense. I don't quite get this.

These statement precedes an experiment regarding an object in a state of constant velocity of zero. Suppose the suddenly moves, the book asks what prevents us from considering that the object is not completely isolated, i.e. we always suppose that there is a force that moves and object. The book then proceeds that if this is true that the object is completely isolated then the second law would be completely meaningless. So there must be a third law which says that there is always an unequal and opposite reaction to what moved the object.

How is this so?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
From the 2nd law there must always be a force that moved the object. But isn't it that we can already suppose a force which changes the acceleration of the object based on the Second Law as opposed from the proposition that it is logically required to posit a third law which axiomatizes the existence of a reacting force somewhere in the universe, as a matter of logic.
 
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Struggling to make relation between elastic force and height'
Hello guys this is what I tried so far. I used the UTS to calculate the force it needs when the rope tears. My idea was to make a relationship/ function that would give me the force depending on height. Yeah i couldnt find a way to solve it. I also thought about how I could use hooks law (how it was given to me in my script) with the thought of instead of having two part of a rope id have one singular rope from the middle to the top where I could find the difference in height. But the...
Back
Top