Reference frame in relative motion

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between two observers, F1 (at rest) and F2 (in motion), and their observations of a particle P. The position vectors of the particle in both frames are related, and the velocity of the particle is derived from differentiating its position vector. A key point of contention is whether the velocity of the particle can be assumed equal in both frames, which some participants argue is incorrect. Clarification is sought regarding the notation used and the assumptions made in the referenced book. The conversation highlights the complexities of relative motion in classical mechanics.
manimaran1605
Messages
60
Reaction score
0
I red a classical mechanics concept in a book. Imagine that we have two observers with two frames of reference F1 and F2 observing a particle P in motion. One of the observer is in motion and another is at rest,(lets take F1 is at rest and F2 is in translation motion with velocity V) let r1 be the position vector of particle with relative to frame of reference F1 and r2 be the position vector of particle with relative to frame of reference r2, the relation between r1 and r2 be r1-D=r2 ( D be the postion vector of F2 relative to F1), to find it velocity at any time t we differentiate r1 with respect to 't', we get v=V+(dr2/dt)F1 where v is the velocity of the particle relative to the frame of reference F1, V is the velocity of the F2 relative to F in straight line, (dr2/dt)F1 is the velocity of the particle relative to F1, How? in the book it is also taken that velocity of particle relative to F1 is taken equal to velocity of particle relative to F2 and said velocity of the particle is equal to the sum of velocity of particle relative to F2 and velocity of frame F2, How can we assume the velocity of particle relative to F1 is taken equal to velocity of particle relative to F2?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
manimaran1605 said:
I red a classical mechanics concept in a book.
Which book - citations are important.

Imagine that we have two observers with two frames of reference F1 and F2 observing a particle P in motion.
Is this particle in motion with respect to both F1 and F2?

One of the observer is in motion and another is at rest, (lets take F1 is at rest and F2 is in translation motion with velocity V) let r1 be the position vector of particle with relative to frame of reference F1 and r2 be the position vector of particle with relative to frame of reference r2, the relation between r1 and r2 be r1-D=r2 ( D be the postion vector of F2 relative to F1),
... when D=0, the origin's coincide.

to find it velocity at any time t we differentiate r1 with respect to 't', we get v=V+(dr2/dt)F1 where v is the velocity of the particle relative to the frame of reference F1,
What is F1 "stationary" with respect to then?
I have a feeling this is the crux of the matter for you.

V is the velocity of the F2 relative to F in straight line, (dr2/dt)F1 is the velocity of the particle relative to F1,
If r1 is the displacement of the particle in F1, then v=dr1/dt would be the velocity of the particle in F1. dr2/dt would be the velocity of the particle in F2. The notation "(dr2/dt)F1" needs to be clarified.

How? in the book it is also taken that velocity of particle relative to F1 is taken equal to velocity of particle relative to F2 and said velocity of the particle is equal to the sum of velocity of particle relative to F2 and velocity of frame F2, How can we assume the velocity of particle relative to F1 is taken equal to velocity of particle relative to F2?
You can't. Either the book is talking rubbish or you have misunderstood something.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
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