Why does 2T-(M+m)g=(M+m)a not work here?

AI Thread Summary
The equation 2T - (M+m)g = (M+m)a is incorrect because it does not account for the equal and opposite force exerted on the platform when the man pulls on the rope. The correct force P required to achieve acceleration a is (m+M)(a+g), not (m+M)(a+g)/2. The platform exerts an equal and opposite normal force, necessitating a greater force to accelerate the combined mass of the man and platform. The tension in the rope contributes to the upward force, which is why the total force is represented as 2P. Understanding these dynamics clarifies the relationship between the forces involved in the system.
physicstime
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Can someone explain why the force P with which the man must pull on the rope to achieve an acceleration a m/s2 IS NOT (m+M)(a+g)/2 and is instead (m+M)(a+g). M+m is the combined mass of man and platform.

Why does 2T-(M+m)g=(M+m)a not work here?
 

Attachments

  • phpHAbcw5.jpg
    phpHAbcw5.jpg
    9.2 KB · Views: 453
Physics news on Phys.org
when he pulls the rope, an equal and opposite force is exerted on the platform.
 
Thanks for the response. But doesn't the platform have an equal and opposite normal force?
 
Exactly why greater force is required to accelerate the mass of the man + platform.

2P=(m+M)(g+a)+P
 
but doesn't the tension of the rope on the other side contribute just as much as the man therefore doubling the total force upwards?
 
Yes, and that is the only reason he can lift himself. This is why the left is 2P.
 
Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'

Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'

Here are two fragments from Banach's monograph in Mechanics I have never seen the term <<velocity of transport>> in English texts. Actually I have never seen this term being named somehow in English. This term has a name in Russian books. I looked through the original Banach's text in Polish and there is a Polish name for this term. It is a little bit surprising that the Polish name differs from the Russian one and also differs from this English translation. My question is: Is there...
View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
View full post »

Similar threads

B Relating displacements in a pulley system
Replies
3
Views
2K
Calculating pressure with U.S. customary units
Replies
10
Views
3K
Infinite pulleys problem, why doesn’t this technique work?
Replies
11
Views
2K
3 pulley problem with attached masses
Replies
15
Views
6K
A question about potential energy and work
Replies
5
Views
1K
B Does weight affect the acceleration of an object?
Replies
9
Views
2K
What is the free-body diagram for a massless pulley in free fall?
Replies
31
Views
4K
Problem with pulleys - two fixed and one movable
Replies
22
Views
475
Understanding Accelerating Pulley Systems: Tension, Forces, and Analysis
Replies
5
Views
3K
Using Effective Mass to find the accelerations of 3 masses connected by pulleys
Replies
25
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top