Thinking of rigid solid and NIFR problems

  • Thread starter Thread starter Glomerular
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Solid Thinking
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on preparing for a classical mechanics exam that includes rigid body mechanics and non-inertial frames of reference. A recommended approach for solving problems in non-inertial frames is to first define an inertial frame, establish transformation relations, write equations of motion in the inertial frame, and then transform variables to describe the non-inertial frame. Key references suggested include "Mechanics" by Landau & Lifshitz and "Classical Mechanics" by Goldstein, which cover relevant concepts such as motion in non-inertial frames and the Coriolis force. Additionally, the Foucault pendulum and the problem of dropping a pebble down a vertical mine shaft are mentioned as useful examples to explore further.
Glomerular
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
In two weeks I have my clasical mechanics exam. This includes rigid solid and non inertial frame of reference chapters.

Do you know any problem that involves both themes? This is how my exam is going to be :nb)

Also, do you have any solved-problems book you could recommend me?

Thanks in advance :)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
When you say "rigid solid" are you referring to rigid body mechanics? (such as statics & dynamics?)
 
Yes :DD
 
I think I can safely say that the (almost) universal way to approach problems in non-inertial frames is this:
1. Define an inertial frame;
2. Establish the transformation relations between the inertial frame and the non-inertial frame;
3. Write the equations of motion in the inertial frame;
4. Transform the variables to obtain the description in the non-inertial frame.

Here are some references that may be of interest to you:
1. Landau & Lifshitz, Mechanics, Pergamon, 1960, pp. 127-129, Motion in non-inertial frame of reference
2. Goldstein, Classical Mechanics, Addison-Wesley, 1959, pp. 135-140. The Coriolis Force (This is to be read with care and a grain of salt. Goldstein's results are correct (as I recall), but the coriolis term is an acceleration term, not a force.)

You might want to also look (perhaps on the internet or in a library) for information on the Focault pendulum, and for the problem of dropping a pebble down a vertical mine shaft. I seem to remember that these were both discussed in a text by Constant, but I no longer have the book.
 
TL;DR Summary: Book after Sakurai Modern Quantum Physics I am doing a comprehensive reading of sakurai and I have solved every problem from chapters I finished on my own, I will finish the book within 2 weeks and I want to delve into qft and other particle physics related topics, not from summaries but comprehensive books, I will start a graduate program related to cern in 3 months, I alreadily knew some qft but now I want to do it, hence do a good book with good problems in it first...
TLDR: is Blennow "Mathematical Methods for Physics and Engineering" a good follow-up to Altland "Mathematics for physicists"? Hello everybody, returning to physics after 30-something years, I felt the need to brush up my maths first. It took me 6 months and I'm currently more than half way through the Altland "Mathematics for physicists" book, covering the math for undergraduate studies at the right level of sophystication, most of which I howewer already knew (being an aerospace engineer)...

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
76
Back
Top