Rate of precession caused by mountain on spherical earth

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the rate of precession caused by a mountain on a spherical Earth, with specific parameters provided, including the Earth's radius and mass. The user is attempting to determine the angular velocity of precession after placing the mountain, which results in a "tipping" effect. They reference the concept of "free precession," indicating that the system can be analyzed without external torques. The conversation suggests using Euler's equations of motion for a rotating rigid body to solve the problem. The expected answer for the rate of precession is approximately 1010 years.
student335
Messages
7
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



32eeB6W.png


R = 4000mi
phi = 60
Me = 5.972E24 kg
Mm = 5.972E16 kg
distance of procession = 100 mi

Homework Equations



I know the answer is supposed to be ~1010 years.

I also know what I am trying to do is have that e3 axis be pointing straight up, then when the mountain is placed on it, it "tips" down. So when the Earth continues spinning it know creates that little cone shape above the north pole. It will travel around this cone shape at a constant angular velocity. So when I determine that angular velocity I just divide the 100 miles by that distance. My question is how to find that angular velocity. I tried a few things, but I'm hopelessly stuck.

The Attempt at a Solution



FecuLdZ.jpg
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello and welcome to PF!

"Free precession" usually means precession in the absence of external torques. Are you sure you aren't supposed to treat the entire system (including the mountain) using equations for free precession.

The problem refers to section 10.8 of the text. Can you find any relevant information there? For example, have you covered Euler's equations of motion for a rotating rigid body?

It might help if you tell us what type and level of course this is from.
 
TSny said:
Hello and welcome to PF!

"Free precession" usually means precession in the absence of external torques. Are you sure you aren't supposed to treat the entire system (including the mountain) using equations for free precession.

The problem refers to section 10.8 of the text. Can you find any relevant information there? For example, have you covered Euler's equations of motion for a rotating rigid body?

It might help if you tell us what type and level of course this is from.

This is intermediate mechanics and yes we have "covered" up to section 10.8.

My professor just has us read the book and doesn't cover it in lecture, so I haven't gotten much help on this problem.

So I do understand Euler's equations, I just haven't read about them yet.I assume that the torque_1 and torque_2 values are zero and their respective change in angular velocity is also zero, so we only have to work with torque_3.

Torque_3 is calculated by R x F which is |R|F|sin(theta) which is RMgsin(theta)
 
Last edited:
The earth-plus-mountain object has no external torques applied to it. That's good news! You'll be able to use the Euler equations with no torques ("free precession").
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top