Problem on frame of reference in rotation

AI Thread Summary
In a rotating frame of reference, points on the rotating body can appear stationary relative to an observer within that frame, as demonstrated by the analogy of a merry-go-round. However, when considering a disc rolling without slipping, the relationship between points on the disc complicates the understanding of motion. Specifically, while a point on the circumference may seem stationary to an observer on the disc, the velocities of different points, such as those on opposite ends, differ when viewed from an inertial frame. This highlights the importance of distinguishing between rotating and inertial frames in analyzing motion. Understanding these concepts is crucial for resolving dilemmas related to frame of reference in rotational dynamics.
shreyashebbar
Messages
11
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I wanted to know if I consider the frame of reference as a rotating body itself, then will the points lying on the body rotating be stationary with respect to the rotating frame of reference?

Homework Equations


None


The Attempt at a Solution



As per me, if I am sitting in a merry go round and my friend sitting on other side should appear stationary with respect to me as he is not changing his distance with respect to me.

Kindly help me with this dilemma ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi shreyashebbar! :smile:

Think about a rod rotating about one of its ends, and take the reference frame to be the out-most point. Will all the points appear stationary to you? Take the innermost point(axial), will the whole body still appear stationary in that frame?
 
shreyashebbar said:
As per me, if I am sitting in a merry go round and my friend sitting on other side should appear stationary with respect to me as he is not changing his distance with respect to me.
Correct.

Kindly help me with this dilemma ?
What dilemma?
 
Hello,
when a disc of radius r rolls without slipping by half a revolution. Well I have taken a point on the circumference of the disc which is P which makes contact with the surface. The reference frame is fixed on it. Point Q lies on the diametrically opposite end on the disc.

Hence as the disc rotates the frame of reference should also rotate and when it is turned by half the point Q will still appear on y-axis at distance of 2r.

So my dilemma is if the position vector doesn't change with respect to a point on the disc so it should appear stationary with respect to P. then how come we can say that the velocity of P with respect to ground is towards left and of Q is towards right and hence velocity of p with respect to q is twice the velocity in case of pure rolling?
 
You are confusing frames of reference here.

I suggest that you work on understanding physics from the perspective of inertial frames before you delve into using rotating frames.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top