When does Newton's Second Law not hold?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the conditions under which Newton's Second Law may not hold, particularly in scenarios involving changing mass, such as a snowball gaining mass as it rolls down a mountain. Participants explore theoretical and practical implications of this law in high school physics contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that Newton's Second Law does not hold when mass is changing over time, using the example of a snowball gaining mass.
  • Others argue that the law can still apply if one uses the instantaneous mass of the object.
  • A participant mentions that in non-inertial reference frames, additional inertial forces may need to be considered for the law to hold.
  • There is a discussion about the validity of the equation F = d(mv)/dt, with some asserting that it is applicable only to constant-mass systems.
  • Another participant points out that the proper equation for a changing mass system involves both external forces and the reaction force due to mass loss or gain.
  • Concerns are raised about the appropriateness of high school questions that may not be answerable at the introductory level, suggesting that such questions could be better framed for interactive discussions.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about whether the term related to the changing mass can be classified as a force, leading to further questions about how to properly account for it in equations of motion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally do not reach a consensus on the applicability of Newton's Second Law in cases of changing mass, with multiple competing views and interpretations remaining throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the potential misunderstanding of how to apply Newton's Second Law in variable mass systems and the complexity of the equations involved, which may exceed the level of understanding expected in high school physics.

  • #31
Jano L. said:
It is just an abstract point. There is no "material center of mass".
And how do you refer to the point of matter that lies in the spatial coordinates of the geometric c.o.m? (there might be the case that there is no matter there but the usual case is that there is).

I ve to say, though i cannot prove it, my intuition tells me that the velocity of the material c.o.m (in the usual case it exists) and the geometric c.o.m is the same in all cases except in the case there is asymmetry in the way that mass is gained or lost.
 
Science news on Phys.org
  • #32
Delta² said:
And how do you refer to the point of matter that lies in the spatial coordinates of the geometric c.o.m? (there might be the case that there is no matter there but the usual case is that there is).

I do not know any special name for it. The material point is not important.

I ve to say, though i cannot prove it, my intuition tells me that the velocity of the material c.o.m (in the usual case it exists) and the geometric c.o.m is the same in all cases except in the case there is asymmetry in the way that mass is gained or lost.

That is true for rigid bodies. If the parts move with respect to each other, the center of mass of the body may move as well and is not attached to any particular mass point.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
34K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K