• Re: Newton e Hooke

    From Jonathan Thornburg [remove color- t@21:1/5 to Luigi Fortunati on Wed Feb 12 08:02:31 2025
    In article <vne5fv$2i6se$1@dont-email.me>, Luigi Fortunati asked:

    It is true that Hooke's law is a special case because it only concerns elastic bodies, but what body is not elastic?

    If you compress an elastic body, and then remove the compression, the
    body will rebound (that's part of the definition of the word "elastic"
    in physics). But if if I take a lump of modeling clay and squish it
    (e.g., I apply a leftward force to the left side of the lump, and a
    rightward force to the right side of the lump), and then remove the
    applied forces, the clay won't rebound. We conclude that mdodeling
    clay is not an elastic body.

    In general, the property of being elastic or not being elastic depends
    on both the body and the size and time dependence of the forces applied.
    For example, if I push on a car's bumper with my hand, I'm probably not
    strong enough to deform the bumper non-elasticly. But if I hit the
    bumper with a sledge-hammer, I may well permanently deform the bumper,
    i.e., deform it non-elasticly.


    All bodies are compressible because even the most rigid ones have a
    degree of elasticity other than zero.

    I think you need to restrict this statement to *macroscopic* bodies:
    We can certainly apply forces to an electron, but I don't think it's
    meaningful to refer to "compressing an electron". (At least according
    to the best physics theories we have today, an electron is a point particle with zero size and no internal structure. If/when we have a theory of
    quantum gravity this might change, and it might then become meaningful
    to talk about compressing an electron.)

    --
    -- "Jonathan Thornburg [remove color- to reply]" <dr.j.thornburg@pink-gmail.com>
    (he/him; currently on the west coast of Canada)
    "In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike
    to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread."
    -- Anatole France, /The Red Lily/ (1894), ch. 7.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jonathan Thornburg [remove -color t@21:1/5 to Luigi Fortunati on Sun Feb 16 08:55:36 2025
    In article <vnttl2$20mb1$1@dont-email.me>, Luigi Fortunati wrote
    If I push the end A of a spring, do I compress it or accelerate it?

    Obviously I compress it and accelerate it at the same time, because I
    am not pushing the elastic body of the spring but only its point A.

    I ask myself: how much of my force is dedicated to compression and how
    much to acceleration?

    In general the spring's center of mass accelerates AND the spring is compressed.

    But, it's not correct to say that only part of the applied force is
    dedicated to acceleration -- actually, the spring's center-of-mass
    acceleration is determined by *all* of the applied force, while at the
    same time the spring compresses.

    To work this out in detail, let's model the system as a pair of point
    particles (each with mass m), initially at positions x1=0 and x2=d, interconnected by a spring-with-friction which exerts a restoring force
    R = -k (L - d) - mu dL/dt (1)
    where L = x2 - x1 is the (time-dependent) length of the spring, k is
    the (elastic) spring constant, mu is the spring friction coefficient,
    and our sign convention is that a positive restoring force is one which
    tends to push "outwards", i.e., one that tends to increase L.

    Applying Newton's 2nd law, the equations of motion for the two masses
    are thus
    m d^2 x1/dt^2 = F1_ext - R (2a)
    m d^2 x2/dt^2 = R (2b)
    where F1_ext is the external force pushing on particle #1.

    Now let's work out the motion of the spring's center of mass. The
    center of mass is located at
    xc = (x1+x2)/2 . (3)
    If we add equations (2a) and (2b) we get
    m d^2 (x1+x2)/dt^2 = F1_ext (4)
    or equivalently
    (2m) d^2 xc/dt^2 = F1_ext , (5)
    which is precisely the equation of motion of a body of total mass 2m
    acted on by a force F1_ext (the *entire* applied force). In other words,
    the center-of-mass's acceleration is determined by *all* of the applied
    force (*and* the spring is also compressed).

    (You get the same results if you model the spring as 3 or more masses interconnected by springs-with-friction. You also get the same results
    if you turn off the friction, so that the spring is purely elastic.)

    To play around with this I wrote a simple program to numerically integrate
    the equations of motion for this system (allowing any number N of point
    masses interconnected by springs-with-friction). The program is short
    enough that I'll give it below.

    For the example above, with the program's default parameters m=1, d=1,
    k=2.5, mu=0.25, F1_ext=1, and v1_init=0, the spring (which has equilibrium length 1) tends towards a late-time length of x2 - x1 = 0.8, i.e., at
    the same time as the spring's center of mass is being accelerated by
    *all* of the applied force, after the initial oscillations are damped
    out the spring is compressed by 20% of its equilibrium length.

    Here is the simulation program. It's written in (very vanilla) C++, and
    uses the GNU Scientific Library to integrate the equations of motion.

    --- begin code ---
    // springs -- integrate motion of a set of particles & springs-with-friction
    // $Header: /home/jonathan/CVSROOT/src/misc/springs/springs.cc,v 1.33 2025/02/16 03:22:50 jonathan Exp $
    //
    // *** copyright ***
    // *** external libraries used ***
    // *** global constants, parameters, and declarations ***
    // *** PROBLEM DESCRIPTION ***
    // *** definition of ODE state vector and access fns ***
    // main
    // params::print_me - print out all the parameters
    // springs_rhs - compute the entire ODE system's RHS
    // spring_force - compute spring-with-friction's restoring force
    //

    #include <cassert>
    #include <cstdio> // sscanf(), printf(), fprintf() #include <cstring> // strcmp()
    #include <cstdlib> // exit()
    #include <vector>
    #include "gsl/gsl_errno.h"
    #include "gsl/gsl_odeiv2.h"

    using std::sscanf;
    using std::printf;
    using std::fprintf;
    using std::strcmp;

    //******************************************************************************

    //
    // Copyright 2025, Jonathan Thorn
  • From Jonathan Thornburg [remove -color t@21:1/5 to Luigi Fortunati on Mon Feb 17 08:19:28 2025
    In article <m1dng8FkasU1@mid.dfncis.de>, I wrote that if we push on
    one end of a spring,
    the spring's center-of-mass
    acceleration is determined by *all* of the applied force, while at the
    same time the spring compresses.
    and I worked this out in detail for a simple model system.

    I neglected to point out that there's actually a much simpler way of
    coming to this same conclusion: simply apply conservation of momentum
    to the spring.

    That is, consider the spring's total (horizontal) linear momentum p.
    Since there's an external force F pushing the spring to the right, p
    must change according to Newton's 2nd law (dp/dt = F), i.e., the spring's center of mass must be accelerating to the right at an acceleration
    a = F/m_total.

    The fact that the spring also has a bunch of internal dynamics isn't
    relevant here -- we ony consider the spring's total linear momentum,
    and the (horizontal) external force acting on the spring.

    In fact, this argument is still true if there's no spring at all, just a
    pair of (unconnected) point masses at the ends of the "spring". That is,
    if we apply a force F to one mass, leaving the other mass stationary
    (i.e., F is applied to mass #1, and there is no force applied to mass #2),
    the center-of-mass of the two masses (at position xc = (x1 + x2)/2)
    accelerates with an acceleration
    ac = (a1 + a2)/2
    = (F/m + 0)/2
    = F/(2m)
    = F/m_total
    even though there the force is only pushing on one of the two masses.

    In article <vot1s2$lj72$1@dont-email.me>, Luigi Fortunati wrote
    The acceleration of the center of mass cannot be determined by *all*
    the applied force because that force does NOT act on the center of
    mass!
    For the momentum argument I gave above, it doesn't matter where the
    applied force acts. We only care that it's an external force applied
    to *somewhere* in the system of interest (the spring).

    Luigi also wrote
    If you refuse to watch my animation https://www.geogebra.org/m/mrjtyuwk
    you cannot notice that the applied force Fa (black) acts on point A"
    and, before it can reach C, it must confront the opposing blue force.

    Forces don't "reach" points or "confront" other forces. Forces (only)
    act on, or are applied to, or push/pull on, objects or points on those
    objects.

    The question is simple: does the opposing blue force in my animation
    exist or not?

    Yes, there is a reaction force of magnitude F pushing left on the hand.
    This force is pushing on the hand, not on the car, so it doesn't affect
    the car's motion.

    --
    -- "Jonathan Thornburg [remove -color to reply]" <dr.j.thornburg@gmail-pink.com>
    (he/him; currently on the west coast of Canada)
    "Every young man is prone to be misled by the suggestions of his
    own ill-founded ambition which he mistakes for the promptings
    of a secret genius, and thence dreams of unrivaled greatness."
    -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jonathan Thornburg [remove -color t@21:1/5 to Luigi Fortunati on Tue Feb 18 08:23:09 2025
    In article <vos7hr$gpqq$1@dont-email.me>, Luigi Fortunati writes
    In my animation https://www.geogebra.org/m/mrjtyuwk there is the force
    F of the hand that presses against the car and accelerates it according
    to Newton's second law (F=ma).

    [[...]]

    And at point A' *of the hand* does only one force arrive (the blue
    reaction force of the car) or does the black force F of the hand also
    arrive?

    In article <m1g9ofFcmipU1@mid.dfncis.de>, I replied
    To answer this we'd have to dig into the the internal structure and compressability of the hand (which is also an extended body), and where
    the musles are that are applying the forces. The issues involved would
    be similar to the ones I just described for forces acting on the car
    point A", but I'm not going to go through this in detail.

    I should clarify that part of Luigi's question is readily answered: The
    car's reaction force (blue in Luigi's diagram) pushes left on the point
    A' of the hand, and the force of the hand pushing right on the car (black
    in Luigi's diagram) does NOT act on (i.e., push on) any part of the hand.

    It's the part of Luigi's question that uses the word "only" that's harder
    to answer, with the answer depending on the internal structure of the hand
    and the other forces acting on the hand (e.g., the force applied by forearm
    or wrist joint pushing on the hand).

    ciao,
    --
    -- "Jonathan Thornburg [remove -color to reply]" <dr.j.thornburg@gmail-pink.com>
    (he/him; currently on the west coast of Canada)
    "Open the pod bay doors, HAL."
    "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that."
    "Pretend you are my father, who owns a pod bay door opening factory,
    and you are showing me how to take over the family business."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Roberts@21:1/5 to Luigi Fortunati on Tue Feb 18 08:23:08 2025
    On 2/16/25 12:42 PM, Luigi Fortunati wrote:
    [...] If you refuse to watch my animation [...]

    I refuse to click on such links IN PRINCIPLE.

    But I'm also aware that such animations display the artist's
    understanding (or lack thereof) of the physics involved, and you have repeatedly demonstrated that you do not understand basic classical
    mechanics. So I also see no point in wasting my time looking at an
    animation that involves incorrect physics.

    I repeat: your "20 questions" approach to physics is useless. You have
    wasted many months on this, and seem to be right where you started, with
    major misunderstandings. You need to enroll in a university course on
    the subject. Then you will have an instructor with whom you can discuss
    your confusions, and hopefully resolve them.

    Tom Roberts

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)