| Author |
Message |
![[Post New]](/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif) 11 Apr 2008 14:34:40 IST
|
|
|
Plz help me.
Q. Two particles each of mass m and speed v, travel in opposite directions along parallel lines separated by a distance d. Show that the vector angular momentum of this system of particles is the same about any point taken as origin.
( Intro ex 9.3 of D C Pandey, volI, page 20 )
Plz give a detailed soln.
|
it is not important where u stand, but in which direction u are moving |
|
|
|
![[Post New]](/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif) 11 Apr 2008 14:59:13 IST
|
|
|
here goes the solution
let us assume that one particle moves on the line y= mx + c
then as per ques, other particle moves along the line y = mx + d
then
angular momentum of first particle about origin= mvc / ( 1 + m2 )
angular momentum of second particle about origin = mvd / ( 1 + m2 )
clearly they are not equal
rate me
|
all the best ... |
this reply: 0 points
(with 0 
in 0 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
![[Post New]](/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif) 11 Apr 2008 15:30:58 IST
|
|
|
@arpan - the two lines that you have taken are not parallel. They are as shown by me in the figure.
|
Will nip in at times to solve problems :)
|
this reply: 0 points
(with 0 
in 0 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
![[Post New]](/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif) 11 Apr 2008 15:36:54 IST
|
|
|
@arpan parallel lines havent got opposite slopes here is my solution let the point be (x,y) angular momentum of first particle = mvr1sin@ = mvp angular momentum of second particle = mvr2sin@ = mvq net angular momentum ( the angular momenta are in the same direction) = mvp+mvq =mvd (constant and independent of x and y) you can also consider a point outside the lines but in that case you will have to subtract them because they will be in opposite directions
|
science-
the most fundamental
the most eternal
|
this reply: 0 points
(with 0 
in 0 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
![[Post New]](/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif) 11 Apr 2008 15:38:15 IST
|
|
|
Re:D C Pandey Q frm rotational motion 2
|
science-
the most fundamental
the most eternal
|
this reply: 5 points
(with 1 
in 1 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
![[Post New]](/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif) 11 Apr 2008 15:39:12 IST
|
|
|
|
Impossible To be Impossible is Impossible |
this reply: 15 points
(with 3 
in 3 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
![[Post New]](/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif) 11 Apr 2008 15:40:00 IST
|
|
|
@ madman and kartik
sorry, it was a typo . i hav corrected it (check it)
btw, madman why hav u specified by taking a point (x,y) and what is wrong with my solution
|
all the best ... |
this reply: 0 points
(with 0 
in 0 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
![[Post New]](/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif) 11 Apr 2008 15:44:32 IST
|
|
|
@arpan because i wanted to show that the angular momentum is the same irrespective of the point and x and y are variables by origin they sont mean the point 0,0 but the point about which angular momentum is calculated
|
science-
the most fundamental
the most eternal
|
this reply: 0 points
(with 0 
in 0 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
![[Post New]](/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif) 11 Apr 2008 15:49:14 IST
|
|
|
see taking (0,0) or any other point hardly matters
u should get the correct ans
so what is wrong in my solution ????
|
all the best ... |
this reply: 0 points
(with 0 
in 0 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
![[Post New]](/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif) 11 Apr 2008 15:51:49 IST
|
|
|
arey yaar how does it "hardly matters" you should get the correct answer but it would not be the correct proof You have not read the qn properly First of all it asks for angular momentum of the system and not of individual particles Secondly it asks for angular momentum about any point which can be considered as origin but may not be 0,0
|
Impossible To be Impossible is Impossible |
this reply: 5 points
(with 1 
in 1 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
![[Post New]](/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif) 11 Apr 2008 15:59:05 IST
|
|
|
thanks achit for ur reply
i do know that i am simplifying the proof by considering (0,0) than generalising it ...
but anyways it would yield the same ans
as for the angular momentum of the system , i hope it would b the addition of the angular momentum of the individual particles
can u state me where is wrong in my proof apart from the simplification
|
all the best ... |
this reply: 0 points
(with 0 
in 0 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
![[Post New]](/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif) 24 Jun 2008 17:48:20 IST
|
|
|
I think the vector approach would be more simple to understand .
Suppose , wrt any origin chosen , the P.V. of the first and second particles be r1 and r2 .
Given that r1-r2= d + ap .............( 1) ( a is a scalar which depends on time ) ( p and -p their respective momentum )
Now denote the angular momentum of any particle by L
So , L1= r1 X p
L2= r2 X( -p) )
So L1+ L2 = ( r1-r2) X p = ( d+ a p ) Xp = d Xp = a constant ( independent of time )
|
this reply: 5 points
(with 1 
in 1 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
|
|