Problem with 2 cars on almost masless spining platform

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter farolero
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cars Platform
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a theoretical scenario involving two cars on a nearly massless spinning platform. Participants explore the implications of the cars moving radially and then turning 90 degrees, particularly focusing on concepts of angular momentum, energy conservation, and reference frames.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the platform's mass can be neglected, while others argue that it cannot be assumed zero mass when applying unbalanced forces or torques.
  • There is a discussion about the initial state of the platform, with some stating it is still and others questioning this assumption.
  • One participant suggests that when the cars turn 90 degrees, the platform would start spinning in the opposite direction to maintain net momentum at zero.
  • Concerns are raised about the frame of reference, with one participant expressing uncertainty about what constitutes an inertial frame.
  • Another participant discusses the conservation of momentum and energy, questioning how these principles apply when changing frames of reference.
  • There is a debate about the implications of frame dependence on kinetic energy, with examples provided to illustrate differing energy values based on the chosen reference frame.
  • One participant notes that while energy and momentum are conserved, they are not invariant, leading to confusion when switching frames of reference.
  • Another participant mentions the concept of "frame jumping," which can lead to errors in analysis when switching reference frames without proper consideration.
  • A later reply introduces the idea that for a disk of finite mass, energy conservation holds, but for a zero-mass disk, the scenario becomes unphysical and undefined.
  • There is a discussion about the limitations of the theoretical setup, with some participants questioning the physical feasibility of the scenario presented.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the assumptions about mass, reference frames, and the implications of the cars' movements on the platform. The discussion remains unresolved with no consensus on the physical validity of the scenario or the outcomes of the proposed actions.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on the assumption of the platform's mass, the challenges of defining inertial frames, and the implications of energy conservation in a theoretical context that may not be physically achievable.

  • #31
Dale said:
Are you assuming that they are "coasting" through the turn, I.e. Doing 0 work with their legs?

Yes they are coasting and doing zero work with their legs.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Then assuming the skates are frictionless on the ice, kinetic energy is conserved. I believe that is the whole point of your setup. You want the skaters to turn while conserving kinetic energy.

So what unknowns do you have, and what constraints and conservation principles can you use?
 
Last edited:
  • #33
I have to keep constant the initial kinetic energy which would be 0.5*200*1=100

And angular momentum that would be zero

So 0=mvr-Iw=200*v*1-iw=0
So 200v=Iw
So supposing the platform has such a shape as to have a moment of inertia equal to 2 then
200v=w

So now i balance energy:
100=0.5*200*v^2+1w^2
100=100v^2+w^2
so 100-100v^2=w^2
substituting:
100-100v^2=40000v^2
so 100=40100v^2
v=0.05 m/s
so w=100

Would this be correct?
 
  • #34
The approach is correct. I haven't checked the arithmetic, but even if you made an error there you have the concept right.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
8K
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
15K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
13K
Replies
4
Views
6K