Restrictions on the frame of reference

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Newton's laws in different frames of reference, particularly focusing on the center of mass (CM) and its validity as a frame when it is accelerating. The context is drawn from a problem in Kleppner and Kolenkow regarding torques and motion on a circular track.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to clarify whether the CM frame can be considered valid in certain directions despite its acceleration. They pose specific questions about the implications of torque calculations when the CM is accelerating.

Discussion Status

Participants are exploring the nuances of the frame of reference used in the problem. Some express uncertainty about the author's chosen frame and discuss the implications of using the CM for torque calculations. There is an exchange of ideas regarding static versus non-inertial frames and the effects of fictitious forces.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the lack of clarity regarding the specific frame of reference utilized by the author in the cited problem. There is also mention of the absence of a copy of the referenced book among some participants, which may limit their ability to engage fully with the problem context.

yucheng
Messages
232
Reaction score
57
Homework Statement
N/A
Relevant Equations
N/A
Newton's laws only hold in intertial frames. In general, the center of mass (CM) is accelerating, so it cannot be used as a frame. However,

1. Suppose that CM is accelerating only in the ##\hat{z}## direction. Does this mean that the CM frame is still valid in the ##\hat{x}## and ##\hat{y}## direction?

2. For rotation, suppose we want to find the torque about the CM, and the CM is acclerating in the ##\hat{x}## direction. We find that a torque about CM as origin, ##\tau = f \hat{z}## Is this then a valid frame of reference for torques as long as they are not in the same direction as the acceleration?

Context(Kleppner and Kolenkow, Problem 7.6:
SmartSelect_20210626-123730_Adobe Acrobat.jpg

So the author found the torques around the CM (the black dot), and since the person is moving around a circular track, there is a centripetal acceleration acting on the CM, and so it should not be inertial.P.S. actually, any point that is accelerating with the conditions given, not just CM.

Thanks in advance!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
yucheng said:
the author found the torques around the CM
It is not clear to me from your post which frame of reference the author is using. Finding a torque about the CM can be done in either.
I do not have a copy of the book you cite.
 
haruspex said:
It is not clear to me from your post which frame of reference the author is using. Finding a torque about the CM can be done in either.
I do not have a copy of the book you cite.
The big dot at the person's stomach.

All the torques are taken with respect to that dot
 
yucheng said:
The big dot at the middle

All the torques are taken with respect to that dot
The author is taking moments about the CM (big black dot), but that does not imply the author is taking the 3D person as the reference frame. You can choose a static frame with origin at the person's CM at some instant; or you could choose a non inertial frame which is anchored to the CM, so orbits the centre of curvature of the track, but does not rotate relative to the ground frame.
Whichever, any fictitious forces act at the CM, so do not affect the torque about there. In all cases, the torque from the difference in the two normal forces balances the torque from the frictional forces.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: yucheng
I didn't even expect to receive so much interesting information. Very interesting forum
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2

Similar threads

Replies
27
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K