Origin and demonstration of Newton's second law

AI Thread Summary
Newton's second law is expressed in two forms: the force equation (eq(1)) and the momentum equation (eq(2)). Historically, eq(2) was the one defined by Newton, although the origins of both equations remain unclear as he did not detail their derivation. The momentum equation allows for the derivation of Einstein's equation E=mc², but Newton likely assumed mass as constant. The discussion also touches on proving eq(2) through the Euler-Lagrange equation and mentions geometric demonstrations used by Newton. The exact experimental basis for these equations is not known.
fab13
Messages
300
Reaction score
7
At high school, we saw without demonstration the fundamental principle of dynamics (2th Newton's law), i.e :

$$\sum \vec{F}=m \vec{a}\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,eq(1)$$

after, at university, we saw another expression of this 2th Newton's law :

$$\sum \vec{F}= \dfrac{d\vec{p}}{dt}\,\,\,\,\, \,\,\,eq(2)$$ with ##\vec{p} = m\vec{v}## the momentum.

From an historical point of view, which one was defined by Newton, eq(1) or (eq2) ?

The eq(2) allows to deduce the famous equation ##E=mc^{2}## by considering ##dp=d(mv)=dm\,v +m\,dv## but I think that Newton could not have access to ##dm## and so defined rather ##m=\text{constant}##, didn't he ?

Does the origin of eq(1) and eq(2) come from physical experiments performed by Newton ?

Secondly, we can proove eq(2) thanks to Euler-Lagrange equation, taking ##p_{i}## the i-th momentum :

$$\dfrac{d}{dt}\bigg(\dfrac{ \partial L}{\partial \dot{q}_{i}}\bigg)=\dfrac{d\,p _{i}}{dt}=\sum F$$

Are there other ways to get the eq(2) ?

Finally, one told me that Newton has used geometric demonstration : Anyone could give me a link on these geometric prooves ?

Thanks for your help
 

Attachments

  • mimetex.gif
    mimetex.gif
    3.3 KB · Views: 634
  • mimetex.gif
    mimetex.gif
    3.3 KB · Views: 645
  • mimetex.gif
    mimetex.gif
    304 bytes · Views: 614
  • mimetex.gif
    mimetex.gif
    3.3 KB · Views: 638
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
fab13 said:
From an historical point of view, which one was defined by Newton, eq(1) or (eq2) ?

The second.

fab13 said:
Does the origin of eq(1) and eq(2) come from physical experiments performed by Newton ?

We will never know. He didn't explain how he derived this equation.
 
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?
Let there be a person in a not yet optimally designed sled at h meters in height. Let this sled free fall but user can steer by tilting their body weight in the sled or by optimal sled shape design point it in some horizontal direction where it is wanted to go - in any horizontal direction but once picked fixed. How to calculate horizontal distance d achievable as function of height h. Thus what is f(h) = d. Put another way, imagine a helicopter rises to a height h, but then shuts off all...
Back
Top