Why doesn't a spinning coin flip over?

  • Thread starter Thread starter hihiip201
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Coin flip Spinning
AI Thread Summary
A spinning coin remains upright due to the conservation of angular momentum, similar to a spinning top. The forces acting on the coin create a stable gyroscopic effect, preventing it from falling flat. The discussion references Euler's equations to explain the dynamics involved, noting that the coin's rotational inertia around its axis contributes to its stability. The oscillation of angular velocities in different axes further supports this behavior. Understanding these principles clarifies why a spinning coin does not simply flop over onto its side.
hihiip201
Messages
169
Reaction score
0
As titled:


I would be satisfied with a qualitative explanation(pure physical), but it would be nice if someone can also provide the mathematical model.



thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you asking why it doesn't stop spinning and flop over onto one of its sides? Just not sure what you mean by "flip over".
 
Remember conservation of angular momentum.

ehild
 
Drakkith said:
Are you asking why it doesn't stop spinning and flop over onto one of its sides? Just not sure what you mean by "flip over".



oh sorry I should be more clear.

I meant why doesn't it fall down on the ground(flat) as a stationary coin would.
 
It follows from Euler's equations. If there is an Omega_z (z is the axis of the coin), and I_z is larger than I_x and I_y, Omega_x and Omega_y follow SHO, and oscillate without flipping over.
You can win money with that, just don't get caught.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...

Similar threads

Back
Top