Physical intepretation of mathematical impossibility

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the dynamics of a bead on a rotating ring, focusing on the relationship between angular velocity (ω), gravitational force (mg), and the normal force (N). As ω decreases, the condition for the bead to remain at an angle θ becomes critical, leading to the conclusion that if ω falls below a certain threshold, the bead will slide to the bottom of the ring. The equations derived show that for ω to maintain a position other than the top or bottom, it must be greater than or equal to the square root of g/R. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding when it is permissible to cancel terms in equations, particularly concerning the sine function. Ultimately, the analysis confirms that there is a minimum angular velocity necessary for the bead to remain in a stable position on the ring.
Ailo
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Hi! I would appreciate your thoughts on something. :smile:

Let's say you have a ring with radius R rotating with angular velocity \omega about a vertical axis. A little bead is threaded onto the ring, and the friction between the bead and the ring is negligible. The bead follows the ring's rotation, and will for a given \omega place itself on a position on the ring which makes an angle \theta with the vertical.

By applying Newton's laws, one obtains the following equations for a given omega (N is the magnitude of the normal force from the ring on the bead):

N cos(\theta) = mg

and

N sin(\theta) = m \omega^2 (R sin(\theta)).

This gives a formula for the cosine of theta;

cos(\theta)=\frac{g}{\omega^2 r}.

So the problem is: what is the physical intepretation of what happens when omega gets so small that the right side of the equation exceeds 1?

My thoughts are that, since N both has to balance the force of gravity and simultaneously create a centripetal acceleration, N obviously has to be larger than mg. When omega sinks below a certain value, that just isn't the case anymore. So if you were to have it at an angle theta at a high angular velocity and then gradually lower omega until you hit that lower bound, it will just slide to the bottom.

Am I right?:redface:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is a funny one, isn't it?
I think the fallacy / flaw / loophole is that N has to be greater or equal to mg. I think that keeps physical reality from imaginary roots to the trig equation. It must mean that there is a minimum omega, below which the ring stays at the bottom.
I can't 'feel' that, though.
For a 1m radius ring, omega would need to be greater than about root g!
 
I think I see the problem. Look at how we solve the equations to get the formula for \theta which you found. We take

N \cos(\theta) = mg

and divide to get

N = \frac{mg}{\cos(\theta)}

Then we substitute into the other equation

N \sin(\theta) = m \omega^2 R \sin(\theta)

to get

m g \frac{\sin(\theta)}{\cos(\theta)} = m \omega^2 R \sin(\theta)

We multiply each side by the quantity \frac{\cos(\theta)}{m \omega^2 R} to get

\frac{g}{\omega^2 R} \sin(\theta) = \sin(\theta) \cos(\theta)

At this point we divide by \sin(\theta). Now, this is only permissible when \sin(\theta) \neq 0, so there are actually multiple solutions to this equation. There are the solutions which come from solving

\sin(\theta) = 0

and those which come from solving

\cos(\theta) = \frac{g}{\omega^2 R}

The first equation always has the solutions \theta = 0 and \theta = \pi, whereas the second equation can only be solved for \omega \geq \sqrt{\frac{g}{R}}. The second equation also only applies when we don't have \theta = 0 or \theta = \pi, as in those cases we would have divided by 0 to get it.

Physically, this corresponds to saying that there is a minimum value of \omega, below which the only fixed points are those at the top and bottom of the ring.
 
Looks good. I must say I had my doubts about canceling the sin thetas but I'm not too confident with what you can and what you can't do in that area. 'Back to first principles' involves going 'back' too many years!
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top