The relationship between normal force and contact

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between normal force and contact, emphasizing that without a normal force, there can be no contact between objects. Participants analyze a statement from a physics textbook that claims "no normal force" equates to "no contact," and debate its correctness. They agree that while "no contact" implies "no normal force," the reverse may not hold true, suggesting a nuanced understanding of these concepts. The conversation highlights the complexities of force interactions when bodies are in contact. Ultimately, the relationship between normal force and contact is critical in understanding physical interactions.
siriux
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
"If there's no normal force, there's no contact."


Is the statement above correct?

What is the relationship between contact and the existence of normal force? Are they necessary and sufficient conditions to each other?

Thanks for your help :p
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why can't there be contact without a normal force?
 
I agree with you SammyS but the statement appears in Physics by Randall D. Knight pg225 paragraph 2 which precisely says

"No normal force" means "no contact"


Did I understand this quote correctly?
 
If that's it in its entirety, then you did.

However it is true that: No contact means no normal force.
 
Sorry I missed a full stop.

"No normal force" means "no contact".

So according to the textbook, "no contact" is the sufficient condition of "no normal force", which I think is wrong while I agree its conversion ("No contact" means "no normal force".) is right as you've just said.
 
siriux said:
So according to the textbook, "no contact" is the sufficient condition of "no normal force", which I think is wrong while I agree its conversion ("No contact" means "no normal force".) is right as you've just said.
Name the force/s that may arise when bodies are in contact.
 

Thread 'Rolling without slipping on a curved surface'

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 .
View full post »

Thread 'Struggling to understand the concept of this question (ice cube in water optics question)'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

Contact and electromagnetic force
Replies
47
Views
5K
How Does the Direction of Normal Contact Force Affect Shelf Stability?
Replies
7
Views
3K
Please help with this suggested solution involving electrostatic press
Replies
14
Views
1K
Angle between normal force and radial line for cylindrical coordinates
Replies
21
Views
2K
Is friction really always related to the normal force?
Replies
5
Views
2K
Relation between Friction, Velocity, and Acceleration
Replies
16
Views
995
Static equilibrium | Uniform sphere on incline | Determining friction
Replies
43
Views
2K
Normal force at the base of a ladder
Replies
20
Views
2K
Why is the normal reaction force zero in the absence of any external force?
Replies
2
Views
1K
Rock climbing with forces along a "cam clamp" axle
Replies
5
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top