Two-Dimensional Elastic Collision

AI Thread Summary
In a two-dimensional elastic collision between two objects of equal mass on a frictionless surface, the final velocities can be determined using trigonometric relationships. When one object is initially stationary, the angles between their paths after the collision are always 90 degrees, which simplifies the calculations. The derived formulas for the final velocities, v1_f = v_i cos(θ1) and v2_f = v_i cos(θ2), are valid under these conditions. The discussion highlights the importance of mass equality and the initial state of the objects for these relationships to hold true. Understanding these principles aids in solving problems related to elastic collisions effectively.
Chetlin
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
(This isn't homework help, but it's something that's been on my homework (and other places in my mechanics class)...I don't know if it belongs here or in the homework section. If I'm wrong, sorry -_-)

I've had a few questions now in class about a two-dimensional elastic collision between two objects on a frictionless surface, and I noticed something on accident. What I did worked both times but I'm not sure if it will always work.

Let's say you have an object sliding across the surface horizontally at speed v_i. It collides elastically with another object with the same mass. The first object then moves at an angle of 25º (25º above the horizontal) and the other object moves at an angle of -65º (65º below the horizontal). I read that the angles these objects make with each other in these kinds of collisions is always 90º, which may be why this works.

The questions then ask you to find the final speed of each object. If you do the math, break it up into components etc. you get, letting \theta_1 = 25^{\circ} and \theta_2 = -65^{\circ} and v_{1_f} be the final velocity of the first object and v_{2_f} being the final velocity of the second object, v_{2_f} = \frac{v_i}{\cos{\theta_2}-\sin{\theta_2}\cot{\theta_1}} and v_{1_f} = \frac{-v_{2_f} \sin{\theta_2}}{\sin{\theta_1}}. But I noticed just from playing around that v_{1_f} = v_i \cos{\theta_1} and v_{2_f} = v_i \cos{\theta_2} which is much simpler.

Even though I'm a math major it's been a long time since I've done trigonometric identities so I've forgotten many of them, but this looks hard to work with anyway. But does anyone know why this is true (if it even really is)? Does it have something to do with the fact that the angle difference is 90º or something to do with the motion relative to the center of mass?

Thanks a lot :D
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Chetlin! :smile:

It only works if one object is initially stationary, and if both have the same mass …

u = v + (M/m)V

u2 = v2 + (M/m)V2

so if M/m = 1, then by squaring you get v.V = 0 :wink:

(and if you know v.V = 0, then taking components of momentum along v or V gives you those cos formulas)
 
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