Understanding the centrifugal force

AI Thread Summary
Centrifugal force is defined as Fcf = m(Ω×r)×Ω, where Ω is angular velocity and r is the radius from the center of rotation. This force appears to act radially outward in a rotating frame, such as in a centrifuge, but is considered fictitious because it does not exist in an inertial frame. In an inertial frame, the tension in the string of a spinning ball provides the necessary centripetal force to maintain circular motion; when the string breaks, the ball continues in a straight line due to inertia. In a rotating frame, the object appears stationary, and the centrifugal force is perceived as a gravity-like force pushing it outward. Ultimately, centrifugal force is a concept that helps explain motion in non-inertial frames but has no physical counterpart in inertial frames.
cytochrome
Messages
163
Reaction score
3
I'm learning about mechanics in noninertial frames and I'd like to clarify the apparent centrifugal force.

To set things straight,

Centrifugal force = Fcf = m(Ω×rΩ

where Ω×r is the instaneous velocity at a point on the outside of a circle (or other rotating path) and Ω is the angular velocity?

By looking at a picture, this would have the centrifugal force pointing out radially from the rotating path (which makes sense when imagining a centrifuge for example).

Is this force called "fictitious" because there is actually no force (as observed from a rotating frame of reference, or an inertial frame?) that is causing an object to accelerate in this radial direction? What is the force exactly?

For example - Imagine you are spinning a ball on a string around in circles and the string breaks, causing the ball to fly outward perpandicular to the direction of motion. Is the centrifugal force responsible for this?

How does this force relate to observations seen from a noninterial or inertial frame?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In inertial frame.

There is no centrifugal force. The reason the string is under tension is because it pulls on the object in order to keep it centripetally accelerating to travel in a circular path. The reason the object flies away when the string breaks is because it continues to travel in the straight path.

In a rotating frame. (Frame rotation matches rotation of the object.)

Object is stationary. It's not moving at all. So the only explanation for the tension in the string is gravity-like force pulling on the object, forcing it away from center. That's the centrifugal force. When the string snaps, that force accelerates the object away from center.The centrifugal force is a fictitious force because it does not exist in an inertial frame of reference. It only manifests when we try to use Newton's Laws to describe motion in an accelerated frame of reference.
 
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