Principia confusing sentence. Please make is simpler

  • Thread starter Thread starter sabanation12
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Confusing
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a complex statement regarding the relationship between weights and their effects on a wheel's movement, specifically focusing on torques and the distances from a pivot point. Participants clarify that the original text, though convoluted, essentially describes how the weights p and A interact through their respective distances from the pivot, O. Understanding the accompanying diagram is crucial for grasping the concept, as the terminology used can be misleading. Some suggest that the original source, likely Newton's "Principia," may not be the best choice for clear explanations of physics concepts. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the need for clearer resources to better understand these principles.
sabanation12
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Can someone please help me understand what this means?:

"And therefore if weight 'p' is to weight 'A' in a ratio compounded of the reciprocal ratio of the least distances of the chords PN, AM, from the center of the wheel, and of the direct ratio of pH to pN, the weights will have the same effect towards moving the wheel and will therefore sustain each other."

I am totally confused.

Tell me if this is insufficient to answer my question.

Thanks for any responses.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Looks like he's just talking about torques.
 
People have to see the diagram to follow what's being said, but it actually very trivial. Look at the diagram when he says "a ratio compounded of the reciprocal ratio of the least distances of the chords". Old English sucks but the ratio is the weights p and A. The "chords" are the distances from pivot point at O. "Compounded of the reciprocal ratio" refers to the effects the chord lengths has on the weights relative torque.

It's really a mess but if you look at the picture and understand that O is a pivot point with weights hanging from the chords at some distance, and understand the forces it entails at various points, then it's obvious a lot of words was thrown at very little.
 
Ok, thanks guys. Even if I don't understand every last detail, I understand the broad idea of what he is talking about
 
People still read the Principia?

Well still better than reading the bible :)
 
sabanation12 said:
Ok, thanks guys. Even if I don't understand every last detail, I understand the broad idea of what he is talking about

It sounds as though this was your first choice for a physics textbook, while this isn't why you made the thread I would suggest that you find something else. There are many books that will give you more information more clearly.
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top