Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

I Velocities in circular motion

  1. Jun 16, 2016 #1
    If a force acts on an object perpendicular to its velocity, why does the speed remains unchanged? Wouldn't the force give rise to a vertical component of velocity on the object and thus increase the speed of the object?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 16, 2016 #2
    It would change the direction of the velocity vector, but not its magnitude.
     
  4. Jun 16, 2016 #3
    It provides a little change of velocity, and if the force keeps acting on the object it may do the constant-speed circular motion, for it doesn't give the object acceleration parallel to itself.
     
  5. Jun 16, 2016 #4
    That's what the calculus tells you. If you kept accelerating in the same direction, then you would change the speed. But in a circular motion, you constantly change the direction of the acceleration. If you consider an infinitesimal time-step of size epsilon, the amount of speed change is proportional to epsilon squared. So, in the limit of epsilon->0, there is no speed change.
     
  6. Jun 17, 2016 #5

    A.T.

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    How should the speed change, increase or decrease?
     
  7. Jun 17, 2016 #6
    "Wouldn't the force give rise to a vertical component of velocity on the object"- It would, but without changing the magnitude of the velocity vector, and thus only changes the direction of velocity.
    To prove this, take P to be the power of the force delivered when the object has velocity V,
    Then P= (Force vector).(Velocity vector) at that instant, but since Force and velocity are perpendicular, P would be 0.
    Hence work done by the force would be 0, and hence change in Kinetic energy would be zero.Thus, the speed would remain same, but the direction of velocity changes.
     
  8. Jun 17, 2016 #7
    I know the velocity is changing because of the direction. Let's suppose the object is stationary. If the force acts on it in any direction it will give rise to a SPEED in that direction. Why cant we apply the same analogy in circular motion? More importantly, why isn't force giving rise to a component of SPEED in any direction?
     
  9. Jun 17, 2016 #8

    A.T.

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Because you cannot apply a force perpendicularly to a velocity of zero.

    Speed doesn’t have components, it's a scalar.
     
  10. Jun 17, 2016 #9

    sophiecentaur

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Energy considerations are often a good way into solving problems and explaining things.
    Here's something to think about. You are thinking that, perhaps, speed should increase. If the speed increased then so would the Kinetic Energy. That would involve the need for Energy to be put into the system. (in the absence of friction, circular motion will carry on forever) The only way that energy to be put in would be in the form of Work, which is Force times the distance moved along the line of action of the force. The Force would be the centripetal force and the distance (when moving in a circle) would be Zero (radius doesn't change). So no work is done and, hence, the Kinetic Energy (and consequently the speed) can't be increasing.
     
  11. Jun 17, 2016 #10

    jbriggs444

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    You may be imagining a long, narrow right triangle with the velocity of the object as the long side, the incremental velocity produced by acceleration as the short side and the resulting final velocity as the hypotenuse. That picture is problematic for three reasons (or one reason expressed in three ways perhaps).

    1. In the limit as the size of the interval goes to zero, the hypotenuse is the same length as the initial velocity (mentioned by Khashishi)
    2. The acceleration is in a constantly changing direction. It's not really a right triangle because the current acceleration not always at right angles to the initial velocity. The short side is a circular arc whose direction is ambiguous.
    3. The picture is prejudiced toward progress forward in time. If you extend it backwards to a tiny prior interval, the initial velocity is the hypotenuse, the increment is the short side and the final velocity is the long side. Rather than speeding it up, the mental picture says that the acceleration should be slowing the object down.
     
  12. Jun 17, 2016 #11
    It is not changing speed because at no time is there a component of force in the direction that it is moving.
     
  13. Jun 17, 2016 #12
    The force will be drawing the object towards the center. So as soon the object will change direction and try to orient towards the center it would've travelled a small distance in the direction of force.
     
  14. Jun 17, 2016 #13
    So???
     
  15. Jun 17, 2016 #14
    I am not talking about the triangle because when the angle is very small it can resemble a right triangle. What I am asking is whenever we apply a force the objects is accelerated in that direction. As a result the magnitude of velocity must change. And if it isn't changing then it must be because the other component of the velocity is decreased. So what is decreasing the other component?
     
  16. Jun 17, 2016 #15
    There will be a gain in energy which could compensate for the increase in kinetic energy.
     
  17. Jun 17, 2016 #16

    sophiecentaur

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Yes it is but the radius does not decrease (it doesn't get any closer to the centre) so no Work is done. If you were sitting at the centre of rotation and going round at the same rate, the string you were holding would not be changing length and the tension in the string would be the same. No change in energy so no change in speed,
     
  18. Jun 17, 2016 #17

    sophiecentaur

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    You are basically asking how the Calculus method can be used to establish the v2/r formula. If you understand any calculus then the answer is easy. If not then it may be best to accept it and find out later how to derive the formula. Physics will be full of formulae that you cannot yet derive but you are happy to accept the results - so don't feel bad about it. An arm waving explanation is not really a 'proof' in any case.
     
  19. Jun 17, 2016 #18
    But the object does travel in the direction of force so according to Energy = Force * Displacement there could be an increase in energy. Btw that wasn't my question.
    My question is simply why is the magnitude of velocity not changing even though a force is acting on the body?
    I am going to list why I am confused about this.
    1. If a force acts on an object, the object is accelerated. What I think it means is it gets velocity in that direction and the other components of velocities on that object are not influenced by that force. (Components of velocity perpendicular to the force)
    2. Since an object is accelerated and gains a "new" velocity in that direction, the resultant velocity will be bound to be greater
     
  20. Jun 17, 2016 #19

    sophiecentaur

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    How can there be any change in the Energy if the motion is not speeding up or slowing down?
    [or vice versa].
     
  21. Jun 17, 2016 #20
    I can comprehend calculus but calculus wasn't used to derive the formula v2/r (when I was taught)
    This was how it was derived
    dx = dv/v (assuming that angle x is very small )
    vdx = dv
    v dx/dt = dv/dt
    Then by substituting the necessary equation we arrived at a = v2/r
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted



Similar Discussions: Velocities in circular motion
  1. Circular Motion (Replies: 6)

  2. Circular motion (Replies: 1)

Loading...