MHB Particles rotating about each other with uniform angular speed

Click For Summary
Two particles of mass m and M rotate around a common center of gravity under an attractive force F, maintaining a separation R and an angular velocity ω. The correct equations for the forces acting on each mass are F = mω²r₁ and F = Mω²r₂, where r₁ and r₂ are the distances from each mass to the center of rotation. The total separation R is the sum of these distances, R = r₁ + r₂. The relationship between R, F, and ω is established as R = (F/ω²)(1/m + 1/M). The discussion emphasizes the necessity of equal angular velocities for the system to maintain a constant separation.
Fantini
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
267
Reaction score
0
Here's the problem:

Two particles of mass $m$ and $M$ undergo uniform circular motion about each other at a separation $R$ under the influence of an attractive force $F$. The angular velocity is $\omega$ radians per second. Show that

$$R = \frac{F}{\omega^2} \left( \frac{1}{m} + \frac{1}{M} \right).$$

I don't understand what is meant by undergo circular motion about each other.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Fantini said:
Here's the problem:

Two particles of mass $m$ and $M$ undergo uniform circular motion about each other at a separation $R$ under the influence of an attractive force $F$. The angular velocity is $\omega$ radians per second. Show that

$$R = \frac{F}{\omega^2} \left( \frac{1}{m} + \frac{1}{M} \right).$$

I don't understand what is meant by undergo circular motion about each other.

Hi Fantini,

For instance 2 bodies attracted by gravity do that.
In that case they both make a circular movement around the common center of gravity.
 
Thank you, ILS. This confirms my initial sketch of the situation was correct. A colleague managed to solve it during a brainstorm today. Here's the solution.

For each body we can equate the resultant force to mass times the acceleration it feels, therefore we have the set of equations

$$F = \frac{m \omega^2 R}{2}, \text{ and } F = \frac{M \omega^2 R}{2}.$$

Isolating $R$ in both gives

$$R = \frac{2F}{m \omega^2} \text{ and } R = \frac{2F}{M \omega^2}.$$

Adding them results in

$$2R = \frac{2F}{\omega^2} \left( \frac{1}{m} + \frac{1}{M} \right)$$

and we have

$$R = \frac{F}{\omega^2} \left( \frac{1}{m} + \frac{1}{M} \right).$$
 
Fantini said:
Thank you, ILS. This confirms my initial sketch of the situation was correct. A colleague managed to solve it during a brainstorm today. Here's the solution.

For each body we can equate the resultant force to mass times the acceleration it feels, therefore we have the set of equations

$$F = \frac{m \omega^2 R}{2}, \text{ and } F = \frac{M \omega^2 R}{2}.$$

I believe... that is not correct.
It seems your colleague is assuming that the common point of rotation is halfway the 2 masses, but as I see it, there is nothing that suggests that.
It appears to be accidental that the right answer came out.

As I see it, mass $m$ has a distance of $r_1$ to the common point of rotation.
And mass $M$ has a distance of $r_2$ to the common point of rotation.

I believe that the proper set of equations is:
\begin{cases}
F=m\omega^2 r_1 \\
F=M\omega^2 r_2 \\
R=r_1+r_2
\end{cases}
 
I see. So if mass $m$ is closer to the center of rotation than mass $M$ then it should have a smaller speed because it covers less distance, while mass $M$ has greater speed because it covers greater distance.

Either way, they are always at an angle of $\pi$ with each other such that $R$ is constant, correct?
 
Last edited:
Fantini said:
I see. So if mass $m$ is closer to the center of rotation than mass $M$ then it should have a smaller speed because it covers less distance, while mass $M$ has greater speed because it covers greater distance.

Either way, they are always at an angle of $pi$ with each other such that $R$ is constant, correct?

Exactly.

The force $F$ is the centripetal force that dictates the relation between the $\omega$'s and the respective radiuses.
The separation $R$ can only be constant if the $\omega$'s are the same, meaning the angle is a constant $\pi$.
 
I have been insisting to my statistics students that for probabilities, the rule is the number of significant figures is the number of digits past the leading zeros or leading nines. For example to give 4 significant figures for a probability: 0.000001234 and 0.99999991234 are the correct number of decimal places. That way the complementary probability can also be given to the same significant figures ( 0.999998766 and 0.00000008766 respectively). More generally if you have a value that...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
683
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
67
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
335
Views
15K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
2K