Rotational stability of an m&m

AI Thread Summary
When spinning peanut butter M&M's around their minor axis, they initially rotate until reaching a certain velocity, then shift to spinning around their major axis before stabilizing back to the minor axis as they slow down. This behavior occurs due to the wobble that creates a circular trace at the point of contact, generating a torque that helps right the candy. Unlike a sphere, which lacks a major and minor axis, a quarter can exhibit similar behavior if spun rapidly. The interplay of gravitational torque and the torque from the point of contact allows the M&M to return to a stable orientation. This phenomenon highlights the unique rotational dynamics of asymmetric objects like M&M's compared to symmetrical ones.
ailijic
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I was bored at work and started spinning m&m's, specifically peanut butter m&m's.

If I spin the candy about its minor axis it will rotate about said axis until it reaches a certain velocity and then will rotate and start spinning about its major axis and then as it slows it will rotate back down to the minor axis and come to rest to the logical and most stable orientation.

Why does this happen?
How is it different than a rotating sphere or say a quarter?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
When you spin the m&m, it's going to wobble a bit. In your imagination, keep track of the point of contact between the m&m and the table. When you spin the m&m on its minor axis, a little wobble makes the point of contact trace out a circle. At every point on that circle, there is a force on that part of the m&m that is directed toward the center, which acts as a torque on the m&m. Granted, gravity acting on the center of mass of the m&m is another torque in the opposite direction, but, as you have experienced, that can be overcome if you spin the m&m fast enough. Essentially, the center of contact is pulled to the center, and the m&m is righted. Once it looses enough energy, it will fall back down.

How is this different from a sphere or quarter?
Well, a sphere has no major/minor axis, so this won't happen with a sphere, but it can happen with a quarter! You'd have to spin it really fast, though.
 
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