Understanding Newton's Law: Motion of a Bird in a Rotating Frame of Reference

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the confusion surrounding the motion of a bird as observed from a stationary point, specifically the CN Tower, while considering a rotating frame of reference provided by a merry-go-round. Participants express uncertainty about how to accurately depict the bird's flight path, questioning the need to reconcile two different frames of reference. The stationary observer's perspective complicates the interpretation of the bird's motion, leading to confusion over how to apply Newton's laws in this context. There is a consensus that the wording of the question may be misleading or incorrect. Clarification is sought on how to integrate the two frames of reference effectively.
wikidrox
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
An observer standing on the observation deck of the CN tower watches a bird fly by a rotating merry go round on the ground. Draw the path of the bird's flight as seen by the observer, with the merry go round as the frame of reference. In order to account for the motion of the bird using the merry go round frame of reference, what must be introduced to satisfy Newton's law?

I included the diagram. This question should be easy but it is the way it is worded that throws me off. My initial thought was to connect each interval from the merry go round to the birds path, but I wanted to verify that this was right.
 

Attachments

  • physics 001.jpg
    physics 001.jpg
    8.3 KB · Views: 574
Physics news on Phys.org
Wait, wait, what?

"Draw the path of the bird's flight as seen by the observer [standing on the observation deck of the CN tower]." The CN tower is stationary, right? So we have to draw the path of the bird in a stationary reference frame (the observer's on the CN tower).

"With the merry go round as the frame of reference." So this is a rotating reference frame... But we already decided on the reference frame! What's going on?

cookiemonster
 
exactly!
I don't understand how there can be 2 frames of reference. That is exactly how it is written in the book.
Does this question seem to be incorrect?
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top