Pulley problem (Two masses acting on a third body)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a misunderstanding of forces in a pulley system involving two 5 kg masses pulling a dynamometer. The original poster questions whether the force displayed by the dynamometer should be 50 Nm or 98.1 Nm, reflecting confusion stemming from a previous poor explanation by a teacher. After further contemplation, they realize that the force measured is a reaction force rather than the total weight of the two masses. The poster acknowledges the difficulty in grasping basic concepts despite pursuing more complex topics. This highlights the importance of clear explanations in foundational physics concepts.
J_Archer
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
First off,I would like to apologise for not introducing myself.
I have yet to find that certain part of the forum,but if the mistake was on my part,mods please direct me.

Now to go to the real issue.


This is something I've long "gotten over",meaning it was in the introductory lessons in college,I forgot about it,but honestly it never "clicked".

My teacher gave me a real bad explanation.



In the attached picture,the two objects with m=5kg ,are pulling a third object,or to be precise a dynometer.
What amount of force will the dynometer show?

The teachers answer was 50Nm(49.05Nm) ,but somehow the number 98.1Nm is going around my brain.

I don't think I have enough credentials to contradict him,and honestly don't know If I am right,doubt it somehow,but there's this part of my brain that just can't let it go.

So ,if you would be so kind as to give me the correct answer and a good explanation.

Thank you very much.

(Also,I apologise for any technical terms I might have misspelled or missed entirely,English is my second language)
 

Attachments

  • 3rd law.jpg
    3rd law.jpg
    6.4 KB · Views: 475
Physics news on Phys.org
Thanks.

I gave it a good solid thought for the past hour or so,and gotten to the same conclusion,but was still a bit iffy,this assured me though.

I'm actually a bit ashamed now,strange how sometimes we can't even grasp the simplest of things but yet try to go for the more complex.

Oh well,all a part of the human experience...

EDIT: To elaborate my train of thought,in case someone else might be going through the same konundrum.
Since I expected 49.05Nm from one weight,98.1 was an immediate thought linked to two weights,but it took me an imaginary wall to realize that the weight was,let's put it,all ready there,just in a different form.
And of course then it hit me that I was measuring the force of reaction and not the actual weight.
 
Last edited:
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top