Why Does a Nickel Transfer Kinetic Energy Differently to a Penny Than to a Wall?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jakeddong
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Force
AI Thread Summary
A nickel transfers kinetic energy differently to a penny than to a wall due to the principles of momentum conservation and external forces. When the nickel hits the penny, it stops and transfers its momentum, demonstrating that momentum is conserved in a closed system. In contrast, when the nickel strikes a wall, the wall exerts an external force that prevents the conservation of momentum in the same direction, causing the nickel to bounce back instead of stopping. Additionally, the discussion clarifies that force is not cumulative over time in the way described; rather, it is the impulse (force applied over time) that affects motion. Therefore, a constant normal force acting on an object, like a chair in a vacuum, does not lead to eventual failure or "breaking" over time.
jakeddong
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi, so I am currently learning about force in my physics class in high school. I get the calculation part but I'm really confused about the whole concept.

For example: when a nickel slides on a flat surface of glass and hits a penny, the nickel stops and the penny shoots off. The nickel receives the same force it hit the penny with(normal force) and therefore cancels out its motion, proving Newton's Third Law of motion.
But when a sliding nickel hits a nonmovable object such as a wall, it bounces off. Why is it that normal force of nickel does not cancel out its motion in this case? To say more specifically, why did nickel transfer all of its kinetic energy to the penny, but not to the wall?

Another problem.
I learned that force is something that accumulates, meaning that if an object requires 100N of instantaneous force to push it across the ground at a constant speed, then when you apply a constant force 20N/s for 5 seconds, the object moves. Right? So if force accumulates over time, then does that mean everything is technically "breaking"
For example: if a chair is placed in a room of vacuum where the only force exerting on it is the normal force from the gravity. Then, would it break eventually in billions of years because of that constant normal force acting on it?

These are not homework problems, I came up with these scenarios and could not answer why they happen the way they do. So if you could please help answer these I'd really appreciate it. Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
welcome to pf!

hi jakeddong! welcome to pf! :smile:
jakeddong said:
… when a nickel slides on a flat surface of glass and hits a penny, the nickel stops and the penny shoots off. The nickel receives the same force it hit the penny with(normal force) and therefore cancels out its motion, proving Newton's Third Law of motion.

what it really proves is conservation of https://www.physicsforums.com/library.php?do=view_item&itemid=53"

(btw, the nickel will only stop dead if it has the same mass as the penny)

the momentum lost by the nickel is transferred to the penny

(and we usually talk about normal force only when the surfaces stay in contact … when there's only instantaneous contact, we don't bother with the adjective "normal", and anyway then it's not force but impulse, which is force times time)
But when a sliding nickel hits a nonmovable object such as a wall, it bounces off. Why is it that normal force of nickel does not cancel out its motion in this case?

because conservation of momentum (in a particular direction) only applies when there are no external forces (in that direction: perpendicular external forces such as gravity don't matter) …

in this case, there is an external horizontal force keeping the wall stationary, so all momentum bets are off

only the nickel can move, and since energy is (nearly) conserved, that means it has to bounce off
To say more specifically, why did nickel transfer all of its kinetic energy to the penny, but not to the wall?

basically, because it could!
I learned that force is something that accumulates, meaning that if an object requires 100N of instantaneous force to push it across the ground at a constant speed, then when you apply a constant force 20N/s for 5 seconds, the object moves. Right?

no, force is not N/s, it is always N … you apply 20 N of force for 5 s, and you get an impulse of 100 N.s, because

to get something to move, you have to supply it with momentum, or energy

momentum is force times time, and energy is force times distance …

either way, a force (eg 100 N) cannot be applied instantaneously, it needs to be applied over a time …

force times time is called https://www.physicsforums.com/library.php?do=view_item&itemid=340" (or impulsive force)

impulse is measured in Newton seconds (N.s), not Newtons … in your example, 20 N of force for 5 s is an impulse of 100 N.s, and this is not the same as 100 N
So if force accumulates over time, then does that mean everything is technically "breaking"
For example: if a chair is placed in a room of vacuum where the only force exerting on it is the normal force from the gravity. Then, would it break eventually in billions of years because of that constant normal force acting on it?

no

to take an easier example, if a string will break if you hang a weight of 20 N from it, then it requires a force of 20 N to break it

no time is involved; impulse is irrelevant

10 N for 2s or 2000000 s is still only 10 N … it won't break :wink:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think it's easist first to watch a short vidio clip I find these videos very relaxing to watch .. I got to thinking is this being done in the most efficient way? The sand has to be suspended in the water to move it to the outlet ... The faster the water , the more turbulance and the sand stays suspended, so it seems to me the rule of thumb is the hose be aimed towards the outlet at all times .. Many times the workers hit the sand directly which will greatly reduce the water...
Back
Top