directions of gravity
|
|
Thread rating:  |
zxcv_890@hotmail.com - 28 Jun 2008 23:05 GMT As a basic intro to gravity, we're told it is directed straight downward to Earth's center. But then if you look at an incline plane question, you see that gravity can act on angles, as long as it's still directed in a downward direction. We use trigonometry to calculate the magnitude gravity in the direction of the inclined plane, because that is the direction that the object is free to move. We may also calculate the magnitude of gravity perpendicular to the incline if we are concerned about friction.
Here's my question: If gravity acts in *all* downward directions (i.e., not just straight down) regardless of whether or not the object is on an incline, wouldn't the magnitude of the force acting on the object above ground be the sum of all the downward forces, and not just the magnitude of the *straight* downward force. For example, | F_g| decreases as the angle away from straight down increases. Gravity acting straight down on a 10kg mass has a magnitude of approx. 98N, but 10deg. off of straight down (to the right and to the left), the magnitude decreases to 98sin(80) = 96.5. 20deg. off of straight down gives 98sin(70) = 92.1, etc. until gravity loses its effect entirely at the horizontal. Each of these symmetric pairs of forces has a resultant vector that acts straight down. There are infinitely many such pairs, so we would need calculus to sum of all the resultants. In any case, the resultant of these resultants would be a vector directed straight down, but with a magnitude substantially greater than 98N. Therefore the object should be accelerating more than 9.8m/s^2.
mitch.nicolas.raemsch@gmail.com - 28 Jun 2008 23:37 GMT On Jun 28, 2:05 pm, zxcv_...@hotmail.com wrote:
> As a basic intro to gravity, we're told it is directed straight > downward to Earth's center. But then if you look at an incline plane [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > greater than 98N. Therefore the object should be accelerating more > than 9.8m/s^2. Einstein showed us that directions in curved space are curved whether he realized it or not. Your measuring rod is curved because it is extended in the curved space-time continuum of gravity.
Movement and extension are in curved space.
Mitch Raemsch
Uncle Al - 29 Jun 2008 01:53 GMT > On Jun 28, 2:05 pm, zxcv_...@hotmail.com wrote: > > As a basic intro to gravity, we're told it is directed straight [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Einstein [snip crap]
> Mitch Raemsch Idiot. Hey f.cking stooopid - Galileo.
 Signature Uncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
Igor - 28 Jun 2008 23:52 GMT On Jun 28, 6:05 pm, zxcv_...@hotmail.com wrote:
> As a basic intro to gravity, we're told it is directed straight > downward to Earth's center. But then if you look at an incline plane [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > greater than 98N. Therefore the object should be accelerating more > than 9.8m/s^2. Gravity only "acts" in one direction. Any other consideration you're discussing here is a projection of the gravitational acceleration vector into any arbitrary direction along which an object is free to move. Since a physical object can only move in one direction at a time, no summations are required. Now, the path that the object is taking may not be static, and hence the projection may change as needed, such as on a surface of non-constant slope. But again, no summation is required, since at any given instant, an object is still only moving in one particular direction and there's still only one projection angle.
Jim Black - 29 Jun 2008 00:37 GMT > As a basic intro to gravity, we're told it is directed straight > downward to Earth's center. But then if you look at an incline plane [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > We may also calculate the magnitude of gravity perpendicular to the > incline if we are concerned about friction. I think you've misunderstood why we take components of the gravitational force in those sort of problems, and what it means. Neglecting friction, there are *two* forces on a block sliding down an inclined plane, gravity and the force of the inclined plane on the block. Gravity is pulling straight down, but the block can't move straight down without bending the inclined plane. The inclined plane does bend ever so slightly, and as a result of that strain it puts pressure on the block. The inclined plane bends just enough so that the total force on the block is in a direction which won't send the block through the inclined plane.
Here's a picture of the two forces on the block:
http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/652/forcescx1.png
The force of the inclined plane on the block is called the "normal force" because it's normal (perpendicular) to the inclined plane.
And here's a picture of the total force on the block, obtained by adding the two force vectors head-to-tail:
http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/6439/totalzd7.png
Notice that the total force is parallel to the inclined plane. If the normal force was just a little bit smaller, the total force would be pushing the block further into the inclined plane, causing the normal force to continue increasing. If the normal force was a bit larger, it would push the block away from the inclined plane, decreasing the normal force. At this point, the normal force is stable.
You can see from the diagram that the total force and the normal force make a right angle, and that the hypotenuse of the right triangle they form is the gravitational force. Thus, the total force is equal to component of the gravitational force parallel to the inclined plane, and the normal force is -1 times the perpendicular component. But these are just mathematical, geometrical statements, and they don't tell you the physics of what's going on. For that, you have to understand the two forces on the block.
In general, when you solve problems like this, it's a good idea to:
(1) Draw a diagram showing the forces on the object.
(2) Then use the geometry of that diagram to calculate what the forces are.
You should *never* try to short-circuit the diagram by saying things like, "Oh, the force on the block is the component of the gravitational force parallel to the inclined plane," because you don't know if that's true until you've looked at the forces. Many students get into trouble this way.
I hope this helps. Good luck!
 Signature Jim E. Black (domain in headers) How to filter out stupid arguments in 40tude Dialog: !markread,ignore From "Name" +"<email address>" [X] Watch/Ignore works on subthreads
zxcv_890@hotmail.com - 30 Jun 2008 00:01 GMT
> Gravity is pulling straight down, but the block can't move straight down without bending the > inclined plane. The inclined plane does bend ever so slightly, and as a > result of that strain it puts pressure on the block. The inclined plane > bends just enough so that the total force on the block is in a direction > which won't send the block through the inclined plane. Your explanation is excellent, thank you. I'm just unclear about this point you're making about the direction of force that the incline applies to the block being perpendicular to the plane's surface. Could you be more specific about (or could you point me to a resource that better explains) what you mean by "The inclined plane bends just enough so that the total force on the block is in a direction which won't send the block through the inclined plane." That is, what exactly is causing the direction of the force on the block to be perpendicular to the plane's surface (as opposed to, say, straight up)
> I hope this helps. Good luck! Yes it did, thanks!
Jim Black - 30 Jun 2008 20:10 GMT > Your explanation is excellent, thank you. I'm just unclear about this > point you're making about the direction of force that the incline [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > exactly is causing the direction of the force on the block to be > perpendicular to the plane's surface (as opposed to, say, straight up) We can get this from a conservation of energy argument. If you push the block into the inclined plane, bending it, the mechanical potential energy of the inclined plane increases rapidly. That means that work had to be done by the block on the inclined plane. The work done by an object is the distance it moves times the component of the force on the object in the opposite direction (This is for constant force; you need calculus if the force is changing with position, but we'll be working with small enough distances that we can ignore that).
If we knew how much the potential energy increased when you pushed the block into the inclined plane, and the distance moved by the block, we could calculate the perpendicular component of the force from the inclined plane by dividing the two. Likewise, we could calculate the component of the force parallel to the plane's surface by considering what would happen if we moved the block parallel to the surface. If the plane isn't already bent, the potential energy wouldn't change at all, and you'd have zero force parallel to the surface. Even if the plane is bent a little, it should be clear that the potential energy change per distance is much larger perpendicular to the plane than parallel to the plane, so we can ignore any parallel component of the force.
But if friction is present, then this all changes. Then the inclined plane can exert a significant force on the block parallel to its surface. In this case, the work done by the block is converted not into potential energy, but into heat.
When we solve simple mechanics problems, though, we generally don't have to worry about this stuff. All we need to know is that the force from the inclined plane will be perpendicular to its surface, and that its magnitude is just large enough to keep objects from going into the plane.
 Signature Jim E. Black (domain in headers) How to filter out stupid arguments in 40tude Dialog: !markread,ignore From "Name" +"<email address>" [X] Watch/Ignore works on subthreads
Uncle Al - 29 Jun 2008 01:52 GMT > As a basic intro to gravity, we're told it is directed straight > downward to Earth's center. But then if you look at an incline plane [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > We may also calculate the magnitude of gravity perpendicular to the > incline if we are concerned about friction. One hopes you are not in college. If in college, one hopes you are someplace harmess like home economics, fine arts, or political science. Why be a one-eyed man amidst the blind?
> Here's my question: If gravity acts in *all* downward directions > (i.e., not just straight down) a = g[sin(theta)] where a = net downward acceleration, g = 9.8 m/sec^2, and "theta" is the angle of elevation. Are you a diversity admission?
> regardless of whether or not the object > is on an incline, wouldn't the magnitude of the force acting on the [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > greater than 98N. Therefore the object should be accelerating more > than 9.8m/s^2. Knowing something is insufficient. You must know what you know - understanding.
 Signature Uncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
zxcv_890@hotmail.com - 30 Jun 2008 00:13 GMT > One hopes you are not in college. If in college, one hopes you are > someplace harmess like home economics, fine arts, or political > science. Why be a one-eyed man amidst the blind? And one hopes you are not a teacher. If a teacher, one hopes you are someplace harmless like only given students who have zero future potential anyway, or students who have sufficiently thick skin so that they continue to study physics despite the discouraging words of an angry old man unhappy with the world and so frustrated at his powerlessness to change it that he has to pick on innocent students who are just trying to learn. Why be a f-ing a-hole amidst kind souls like Jim Black who are genuinely trying to help people?
> Knowing something is insufficient. You must know what you know - > understanding. Wow, you're just soooooooooo bloody profound, aren't you? Oh, believe me, I know what I know. And what I know is that you are a f-ing a- hole.
Androcles - 30 Jun 2008 01:26 GMT On Jun 28, 8:52 pm, Uncle Al <Uncle...@hate.spam.net> wrote:
> One hopes you are not in college. If in college, one hopes you are > someplace harmess like home economics, fine arts, or political > science. Why be a one-eyed man amidst the blind? And one hopes you are not a teacher. If a teacher, one hopes you are someplace harmless ======================================= No, no, it's "harmess".
like only given students who have zero future potential anyway, or students who have sufficiently thick skin so that they continue to study physics despite the discouraging words of an angry old man unhappy with the world and so frustrated at his powerlessness to change it that he has to pick on innocent students who are just trying to learn. Why be a f-ing a-hole amidst kind souls like Jim Black who are genuinely trying to help people? ========================================= He can't help being a f.cking arsehole. He even has a picture of himself on his web page.
|
|
|