MHB Particles rotating about each other with uniform angular speed

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 $\pi$.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.

Similar threads

Back
Top