What happened to the division of g in the Mach 3 force diagram problem?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the dynamics of a pilot experiencing acceleration in a force diagram. The equation presented indicates that the normal force (N) minus the gravitational force (mg) equals the centripetal force (mv²/R). The pilot's perceived acceleration is expressed as N/m = g + (mv²/R). A participant expresses confusion about the role of gravitational acceleration (g) in the equation, leading to a clarification that resolves the misunderstanding. The interaction highlights the importance of understanding the relationship between forces and acceleration in physics.
delve
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
Here is an answer from a book of mine: From the force diagram we have N-mg=(\frac{mv^2}{R})e_r. The acceleration that the pilot feels is \frac{N}{m}=g+(\frac{mv^2}{R})e_r. I'm confused though; what happened to the g being divided by the last term as well?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi delve! :smile:
delve said:
Here is an answer from a book of mine: From the force diagram we have N-mg=(\frac{mv^2}{R})e_r. The acceleration that the pilot feels is \frac{N}{m}=g+(\frac{mv^2}{R})e_r. I'm confused though; what happened to the g being divided by the last term as well?

I'm not following you …

the equation is equivalent to N/m = g + (v2/R)er

what do you mean by g being divided by something? :confused:
 
Actually, you just helped me realize what I was confused about. Thank you!
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...
Back
Top