Uncovering the Logic Behind the Center of Mass Formula

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the intuition and logic behind the center of mass formula, exploring its significance in understanding motion and balance in physical systems.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the nature of the center of mass as a weighted average location of mass and question the underlying logic of the formula. Some provide mathematical representations and analogies to clarify the concept, while others inquire about the implications of the center of mass in relation to motion and forces.

Discussion Status

The conversation is active, with participants offering insights and clarifications regarding the center of mass. Some have provided mathematical derivations and analogies, while others are seeking further understanding of the implications of the center of mass in physical systems.

Contextual Notes

There are references to high school teachings and potential gaps in understanding, indicating that participants are grappling with foundational concepts and seeking deeper insights.

madah12
Messages
326
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


is there any intuition of why the center of mass formula is what it is? in high school the teacher says is is what it is and that's that or something like that but is there any logic behind it?


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can think of the center of mass as the (weighted) average location of the mass of an object.
 
madah12 said:

Homework Statement


is there any intuition of why the center of mass formula is what it is? in high school the teacher says is is what it is and that's that or something like that but is there any logic behind it?
What center of mass formula are you talking about?

If you mean
[tex]\overline{x}= \frac{\int\int\int \rho(x,y,z)xdxdydz}{\int\int\int \rho(x,y,z)dxdydz}[/tex]

[tex]\overline{y}= \frac{\int\int\int \rho(x,y,z)ydxdydz}{\int\int\int \rho(x,y,z)dxdydz}[/tex]

[tex]\overline{z}= \frac{\int\int\int \rho(x,y,z)zdxdydz}{\int\int\int \rho(x,y,z)dxdydz}[/tex]
where [itex]\rho[/itex] is the density function and M is the total mass, then, as Doc Al said, it is basically an averaging.

Imagine having n masses, m1, m2, ..., mn at distances x1, x2, ..., xn from one end of a platform. Let [itex]\overline{x}[/itex] be the distance from that end to a pivot below the platform at which the platform will balance. The torque due to the weight of each mass, around that end, is the weight times the distance: migxi. The total total torque on the board due to the weights is (m1x1+ m2x2+ ...+ mnxn)g. Of course, the pivot must be exerting an upward force equal to the total weight (m1+ m2+ ...+ mn)g and the torque due to that is [itex](m_1+ m_2+ ...+ m_n)g\overline{x}[/itex] and, in order to balance, those must be equal:

[tex](m_1x_1+ m_2x_2+ ...+ m_nx_n)g= (m_1+ m_2+...+ m_n)g\overline{x}[/tex]
the "g" on each side cancels so that
[tex]\overline{x}= \frac{m_1x_1+ m_2x_2+...+ m_nx_n}{m_1+ m_2+ ...+ m_n}[/tex]

Taking the limit as the number of masses increases and the size of each goes to 0 converts those Riemann sums into integrals:
[tex]\overline{x}= \frac{\int \rho(x)x dx}{\int \rho(x) dx}[/tex]

To convert from one to two or three dimensions, use double or triple integrals in the obvious way.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

[/QUOTE]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why is it that we know that the center of mass WILL represent the system's motion as it is one particle?
 
madah12 said:
Why is it that we know that the center of mass WILL represent the system's motion as it is one particle?
That follows from the definition of center of mass and Newton's 2nd law:

[tex]R_{cm} \equiv \frac {\Sigma{m_i r_i}}{M}[/tex]

Taking the derivative of both sides:

[tex]M a_{cm} = \Sigma{m_i a_i} = F_{total}[/tex]
 
Doc Al said:
That follows from the definition of center of mass and Newton's 2nd law:

[tex]R_{cm} \equiv \frac {\Sigma{m_i r_i}}{M}[/tex]

Taking the derivative of both sides:

[tex]M a_{cm} = \Sigma{m_i a_i} = F_{total}[/tex]

ah I see it all makes sense now thanks.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
7K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K