What's Wrong in the Boy's Reasoning from Newton's 3rd Law?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Meteo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Law
AI Thread Summary
The boy's reasoning about Newton's Third Law is flawed because he misunderstands the interaction between forces acting on different objects. While he correctly identifies that the mower pushes back with equal force, he fails to recognize that these forces do not cancel each other out since they act on separate entities. The force he exerts on the mower is met with a reaction force from the mower on him, but this does not prevent the mower from moving forward. The motion of the mower is influenced by the frictional force from the ground, which allows it to accelerate when pushed. Therefore, the correct interpretation is that the forces do not negate the mower's ability to move, making option D the accurate answer.
Meteo
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Your younger brother is supposed to mow the lawn using a push mower. He reasons from the Newton's Third Law that the mower will push back with the same force he exerts on the mower; therefore nothing will move and attempting to mow the lawn is pointless. What is wrong with his reasoning?

a: The boy has not enough push force on the mower
b: the boy forgot friction force
c: From the 3rd law, no force on mower, but mower has initial speed therefore the mower can keep moving
d: The boy exerts a force on the mower, but the reaction force is exerted by the mower on the boy. The two forces are acting on different objects, and thus cannot cancel.

The answer is D but I need to know why. From what I understand, two forces acting on different objects DO constitute a 3rd law pair. The boy on the mower and the mower on the boy. The thing that's propelling them forward is the force of the surface on the boy as he pushes back on the surface. The static friction force. From my reasoning the answer should be B...
I appreciate your help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
D is a much more direct answer to the question. By answering (b) you are stating that the forces do cancel, which they dont.
 
You have to push to keep the mower going at constant speed only because there is friction. If there were no friction and you pushed the mower, the mower would push back on you (you feel the push in your hands) and the mower accelerates. D is the only correct answer.
 
The force the mower exerts on the person has no bearing on the acceleration of the mower - only on the acceleration of the person. The two forces in this question are acting on two different bodies, so cannot possibly cancel.
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Back
Top