Particles rotating about each other with uniform angular speed

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the dynamics of two particles of different masses undergoing uniform circular motion about each other, influenced by an attractive force. Participants explore the relationship between the separation distance, angular velocity, and the forces acting on the particles, examining both the conceptual understanding and mathematical formulation of the problem.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Debate/contested, Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the meaning of "undergo circular motion about each other," seeking clarification on the concept.
  • Another participant explains that two bodies attracted by gravity can exhibit such motion, rotating around their common center of gravity.
  • A participant presents a solution involving equating the resultant force to mass times acceleration, leading to a derived formula for separation distance.
  • Another participant challenges the correctness of the presented solution, suggesting that the assumption of a common point of rotation being halfway between the two masses is unfounded.
  • This participant proposes a different set of equations that account for the distances of each mass to the common point of rotation, emphasizing the need to consider individual distances.
  • There is a discussion about the relationship between the speeds of the two masses based on their distances from the center of rotation, with one participant noting that the closer mass should have a smaller speed.
  • Participants agree that the two masses maintain a constant angle of π with respect to each other, ensuring that the separation distance remains constant.
  • It is noted that the force acting on the masses is the centripetal force, which relates their angular velocities and respective radii.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the assumptions made in the initial solution, particularly regarding the point of rotation and the distances of the masses. There is no consensus on the correct approach, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the importance of defining the center of rotation and the distances involved, which are not explicitly stated in the initial problem. The mathematical steps and assumptions made by participants are subject to scrutiny and debate.

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 $\pi$.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
67
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
335
Views
16K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K