Understanding Newton's Third Law: Explaining Vertical Motion in a Helicopter

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mashwood
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Newton's third law in the context of a body moving upward against Earth's gravity with constant velocity, particularly in relation to a helicopter's motion. Participants explore the implications of forces acting on the body, the relationship between applied force and weight, and the role of Newton's second law in explaining motion.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question how Newton's third law applies when a body moves upward at constant velocity against gravity, particularly if the applied force equals the weight of the body.
  • Others argue that for a body to start moving upward, an initial upward force greater than its weight is necessary, after which the force can equal the weight to maintain constant velocity.
  • A participant suggests that once a body has achieved a certain velocity, it will continue moving at that velocity in the absence of net forces, referencing Newton's second law.
  • Some participants emphasize that the third law describes the interaction forces but does not explain the motion itself, which is governed by the second law.
  • A later reply mentions the reaction force on the Earth as part of the third law, highlighting the conservation of momentum in the context of gravitational interactions.
  • There is a discussion about the necessity of an initial force greater than weight to achieve upward acceleration before transitioning to constant velocity.
  • One participant uses the example of a bullet fired upward to illustrate that constant velocity requires balanced forces, contrasting it with the scenario of a helicopter.
  • Another participant notes that the question should focus on why a body would stop moving rather than why it moves, given that a net force of zero allows for continued motion.
  • A participant describes the experience of a person in a helicopter, explaining the forces felt during takeoff and constant velocity flight.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the applicability of Newton's third law to the scenario of constant upward motion. While some agree that the third law does not explain the motion, others emphasize its relevance in describing force interactions. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the interpretation of these laws in this context.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the need for an initial force greater than weight to initiate upward motion, and the discussion includes various assumptions about forces acting on the body during different phases of motion. There is also a focus on the distinction between the roles of Newton's second and third laws.

mashwood
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
how can we explain Newton's third law when a body is moving upward against Earth's gravity with constant velocity?in another way if the applied force on the body is equal to it's weight according to the third law, why and how does it move?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If the (net) applied force on the body is always equal to its weight, and it's initially at rest, then it will stay at rest, and not move.

In order for it to start moving upwards, you have to apply a bit more upward force initially. After it starts moving, you can ease off to make the upwards force equal to its weight, and it continues moving at constant velocity. To bring it to a stop, you ease off some more, so the upwards force is less than its weight, until it comes to a stop. Then you make the upwards force equal to its weight again, and it stays at rest at its final height.
 
what if the same body is moving up with very high constant velocity...is the applied force still equal to it's weight...but how?
 
It's just Newton's second law of motion. No net force acts on the body, so it keeps on moving with constant velocity, no matter how high.
 
so, it seems to me that third law can't explain this phenomena?is it so? and how come there is no net force and still the body is moving with high velocity?
 
The laws of motion are observations, not explanations. It's about what happens, not why it happens.

The third law, as applied here, states that the body pushes on whatever keeps it from falling in the gravitational field with the same in magnitude, but opposite force. That's all it says.

That it is moving with constant velocity in the absence of net forces has got little to do with the third law, and everything to do with the second.

It's got such a high velocity because you "gave" it to the body before the motion started.
Once it's got some velocity(including 0), it won't slow down nor speed up, unless a non-zero net force acts upon the body.
 
I could be worth mentioning that, for a body under gravity, there is also a 'third law', reaction force on the Earth itself (to comply with the conservation of momentum).
 
mashwood said:
so, it seems to me that third law can't explain this phenomena?is it so? and how come there is no net force and still the body is moving with high velocity?
You are skipping a step: the step where the force is much higher than the weight and it accelerates to that high velocity. Then the force can be reduced to be equal to the weight and the velocity will remain constant.
 
It's hard to figure out where to begin. For something to be moving at constant velocity, the forces on the object have to cancel out. If you fire a gun upward, the bullet isn't going to travel with constant velocity. It's going to go up, slow down, and come back down (dangerously).
 
  • #10
how can we explain Newton's third law when a body is moving upward against Earth's gravity with constant velocity?in another way if the applied force on the body is equal to it's weight according to the third law, why and how does it move?

Because there is nothing to stop it moving. To stop moving it would have to slow down. Slowing down implies an -ve acceleration. To accelerate you need a force and since the net force is zero it cannot slow down.

The question is not "why does it move" but "why would it stop moving".
 
  • #11
Consider a man in a helicopter taking off...

On the ground the vertical velocity is zero and he feels normal. Newton tells us that the floor of the helicopter exerts a force on the man = mg

In order to lift off the vertical velocity has to increase from zero to some non-zero value. That means there is a vertical acceleration and he feels heavier BUT only while the aircraft is accelerating vertically.

Once the helicopter is climbing at a constant velocity he will feel normal again. Newton tells us that the floor of the helicopter exerts a force on the man = mg.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
4K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
4K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K