Why do moving objects stay balanced

  • Thread starter Thread starter yup790
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
Objects moving in a straight line can fall over due to factors like balance and stability, as demonstrated by an ice skate that tips easily. The gyroscopic effect contributes to the stability of rolling objects, relying on torque and angular momentum. However, stability can also be achieved through steering geometry, as seen in bicycles, which can remain upright even without gyroscopic effects. Research has shown that bicycles can be designed to maintain stability without relying solely on wheel rotation. Understanding these principles can clarify why certain objects remain upright while others do not.
yup790
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Why do gyrascopes or things moving in a stright line not fall over. Probably a simple answer but i cannot work it out.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Whether a thing moving in a straight line falls over or not depends on a number of factors. Try to send a single ice skate along the surface some time. You'll see that it does fall over quite easily. Rolling things don't fall over because of gyroscopic effect. And gyroscopic effect has to do with torque and angular momentum. If you look up gyroscope on Wikipedia, it will get you started. If you'll have specific questions later on, ask them.
 
K^2 said:
Try to send a single ice skate along the surface some time.
It would be possible to replace the wheels of a bicycle with large curved ice skate like blades (non-rolling) and because of the steering geometry, the bike would be stable, without any gyroscopic effects.
 
Yes. I never insisted that gyroscopic effect is the only way to achieve stability. Not sure where you got that from. Just wanted to show a clear example of a situation where the object is most certainly unstable, and a lone skate definitely qualifies.
 
rcgldr said:
It would be possible to replace the wheels of a bicycle with large curved ice skate like blades (non-rolling) and because of the steering geometry, the bike would be stable, without any gyroscopic effects.
No, that is not true. A bicycle is stable precisely because of the rotation of the wheels, not any "steering geometry".
 
HallsofIvy said:
No, that is not true. A bicycle is stable precisely because of the rotation of the wheels, not any "steering geometry".

This has been discussed at length on Physics Forums. Search previous threads. Research groups have literally constructed bikes without gyroscopic effects and they still stay upright when in motion, even without a human pilot, because of the steering geometry.

See this article for instance.
 

Similar threads

B Lever balancing physics (video game design)
Replies
18
Views
2K
B How is an unstable object balanced?
Replies
15
Views
1K
B Do Objects in Free Fall Encounter Air Resistance?
Replies
10
Views
2K
B Curious about the work - energy theorem
Replies
8
Views
1K
I Why Is Moving Backwards on Skates Challenging for Humans?
Replies
8
Views
1K
B Why does a spinning top balance better when it is spinning?
Replies
12
Views
2K
B Curious about Work and Energy Consumption
Replies
8
Views
1K
I Help Needed with Tracker Physics Program Measuring Acceleration
Replies
10
Views
2K
I A question on momentum conservation of bodies in combined motion
Replies
3
Views
870
I When does the instantaneous velocity exist?
Replies
4
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top