Swing and momentum



 Science > Physics > Swing and momentum

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 2

1

 

2

 
Topic: Science > Physics
User: "BernardZ"
Date: 04 Jun 2006 01:51:42 AM
Object: Swing and momentum
While going on a child swing, I was trying to explain the mechanics.
What I found myself stuck on was the momentum. As the swinger goes
higher and higher, the swing velocity on the bottom gets faster and
faster so there does his angular momentum.
Since momentum is conserved where is the other side of the angular
momentum, the only think I can think is the air must be pushed away and
so preserving the angular momentum. Okay if so then a swing should not
work in a vacuum. Which does not sound right!
--
Self control is what keeps us from being rapist.
Observations of Bernard - No 100

.

User: "Martin Hogbin"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 04 Jun 2006 02:38:00 AM
"BernardZ" <bernardZ@Nospam.com> wrote in message news:MPG.1eed2e0942dec8e09899e2@news...

While going on a child swing, I was trying to explain the mechanics.

What I found myself stuck on was the momentum. As the swinger goes
higher and higher, the swing velocity on the bottom gets faster and
faster so there does his angular momentum.

Since momentum is conserved where is the other side of the angular
momentum, the only think I can think is the air must be pushed away and
so preserving the angular momentum. Okay if so then a swing should not
work in a vacuum. Which does not sound right!

Angular momentum is not conserved for a swing.
Martin Hogbin
.
User: "Edward Green"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 04 Jun 2006 11:39:57 AM
Martin Hogbin wrote:

"BernardZ" <bernardZ@Nospam.com> wrote in message news:MPG.1eed2e0942dec8e09899e2@news...

While going on a child swing, I was trying to explain the mechanics.

What I found myself stuck on was the momentum. As the swinger goes
higher and higher, the swing velocity on the bottom gets faster and
faster so there does his angular momentum.

Since momentum is conserved where is the other side of the angular
momentum, the only think I can think is the air must be pushed away and
so preserving the angular momentum. Okay if so then a swing should not
work in a vacuum. Which does not sound right!


Angular momentum is not conserved for a swing.

Next you'll be telling me it violates the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.
It's amazing how children can pump swings, while drawing a force
diagram explaining how they do it might challenge bright freshman
physicists. Of course the Earth and gravity are the other side of the
equation for conserving angular momentum, just as for a pendulum. But
I've never gone through the exercise of understanding how it is
possible for a person dangling in the seat to pump it up in the first
place.
Swings don't seem to be as popular as I remember in my childhood... the
big kid models are gone, only the kiddie swings remain. Obviously,
lawyers are to blame.
Related playground question: how can a child standing in the middle of
a turntable, not touching anything else, make it rotate?
.
User: ""

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 06 Jun 2006 07:57:39 AM
In article <1149439197.240149.230410@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
"Edward Green" <spamspamspam3@netzero.com> wrote:

Martin Hogbin wrote:

"BernardZ" <bernardZ@Nospam.com> wrote in message

news:MPG.1eed2e0942dec8e09899e2@news...

While going on a child swing, I was trying to explain the mechanics.

What I found myself stuck on was the momentum. As the swinger goes
higher and higher, the swing velocity on the bottom gets faster and
faster so there does his angular momentum.

Since momentum is conserved where is the other side of the angular
momentum, the only think I can think is the air must be pushed away and
so preserving the angular momentum. Okay if so then a swing should not
work in a vacuum. Which does not sound right!


Angular momentum is not conserved for a swing.


Next you'll be telling me it violates the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.

It's amazing how children can pump swings, while drawing a force
diagram explaining how they do it might challenge bright freshman
physicists. Of course the Earth and gravity are the other side of the
equation for conserving angular momentum, just as for a pendulum. But
I've never gone through the exercise of understanding how it is
possible for a person dangling in the seat to pump it up in the first
place.

I was never able to do that; I always needed a jump start.
Thinking about it, the kid alters his center of mass. That
travels into the rope which begins swinging.
How's that?


Swings don't seem to be as popular as I remember in my childhood... the
big kid models are gone, only the kiddie swings remain. Obviously,
lawyers are to blame.

Ours was tarred when I was kid. We didn't get dirty anymore.


Related playground question: how can a child standing in the middle of
a turntable, not touching anything else, make it rotate?

He turns his head, triangulating the point where his mother
called so he can run the other way.
/BAH
.
User: "CWatters"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 06 Jun 2006 01:45:03 PM
<jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:e63u43$8ss_003@s941.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...

I've never gone through the exercise of understanding how it is
possible for a person dangling in the seat to pump it up in the first
place.

It's the same as the falling cat problem. How can a cat dropped upside down
turn himself the right way up.
.
User: ""

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 07 Jun 2006 08:01:35 AM
In article <4485cd29$0$30356$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net>,
"CWatters" <colin.watters@turnersNOSPAMoak.plus.net> wrote:


<jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:e63u43$8ss_003@s941.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...

I've never gone through the exercise of understanding how it is
possible for a person dangling in the seat to pump it up in the first
place.


It's the same as the falling cat problem. How can a cat dropped upside down
turn himself the right way up.

A cat has the wrong side buttered.
/BAH
.
User: "CWatters"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 08 Jun 2006 08:12:57 AM
<jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:e66inf$8qk_009@s958.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...

In article <4485cd29$0$30356$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net>,
"CWatters" <colin.watters@turnersNOSPAMoak.plus.net> wrote:


<jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:e63u43$8ss_003@s941.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...

I've never gone through the exercise of understanding how it is
possible for a person dangling in the seat to pump it up in the first
place.


It's the same as the falling cat problem. How can a cat dropped upside

down

turn himself the right way up.


A cat has the wrong side buttered.

LOL
.


User: "Timo A. Nieminen"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 06 Jun 2006 04:35:48 PM
On Tue, 6 Jun 2006, CWatters wrote:

<jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:

I've never gone through the exercise of understanding how it is
possible for a person dangling in the seat to pump it up in the first
place.


It's the same as the falling cat problem. How can a cat dropped upside down
turn himself the right way up.

Not the same. The angular momentum of the cat is constant, swing-pumping
is about getting more.
But both are good problems to learn from.
--
Timo Nieminen - Home page: http://www.physics.uq.edu.au/people/nieminen/
E-prints: http://eprint.uq.edu.au/view/person/Nieminen,_Timo_A..html
Shrine to Spirits: http://www.users.bigpond.com/timo_nieminen/spirits.html
.
User: "Edward Green"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 10 Jun 2006 11:41:54 AM
Timo A. Nieminen wrote:

On Tue, 6 Jun 2006, CWatters wrote:

<jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:

I've never gone through the exercise of understanding how it is
possible for a person dangling in the seat to pump it up in the first
place.


It's the same as the falling cat problem. How can a cat dropped upside down
turn himself the right way up.


Not the same. The angular momentum of the cat is constant, swing-pumping
is about getting more.

Yes.
.



User: "Timo A. Nieminen"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 06 Jun 2006 04:24:08 PM
On Tue, 6 Jun 2006,
wrote:

"Edward Green" <spamspamspam3@netzero.com> wrote:


Related playground question: how can a child standing in the middle of
a turntable, not touching anything else, make it rotate?


He turns his head, triangulating the point where his mother
called so he can run the other way.

The trick is to not stand in the middle. Gate-pumping was an occasional
fun distraction - stand on a gate, and make it open or close without
contact with the ground. Friction can be useful! I've not done the maths
for it, but I think one could use it to find the coefficient of friction
for the gate hinges.
Swing-pumping is more mysterious than gate-pumping. Perhaps a nice
discussion topic for students.
--
Timo Nieminen - Home page: http://www.physics.uq.edu.au/people/nieminen/
E-prints: http://eprint.uq.edu.au/view/person/Nieminen,_Timo_A..html
Shrine to Spirits: http://www.users.bigpond.com/timo_nieminen/spirits.html
.
User: "Edward Green"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 10 Jun 2006 11:55:14 AM
Timo A. Nieminen wrote:

On Tue, 6 Jun 2006,

wrote:

"Edward Green" <spamspamspam3@netzero.com> wrote:


Related playground question: how can a child standing in the middle of
a turntable, not touching anything else, make it rotate?


He turns his head, triangulating the point where his mother
called so he can run the other way.


The trick is to not stand in the middle. Gate-pumping was an occasional
fun distraction - stand on a gate, and make it open or close without
contact with the ground. Friction can be useful! I've not done the maths
for it, but I think one could use it to find the coefficient of friction
for the gate hinges.

But I said "the middle", though I should have added "frictionless and
level", so you are still cheating. You've already suggested the answer
elsewhere.
If the child is allowed off center, another answer is possible even
given the complete specification: he begins to run around the turntable
in a circle. The turntable will counter-rotate just fast enough so
that the net angular momentum remains zero.

Swing-pumping is more mysterious than gate-pumping. Perhaps a nice
discussion topic for students.

I've no doubt I could work it out, but I'm saving that pleasure. ;-)
.


User: "Henning Makholm"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 06 Jun 2006 02:04:22 PM
Scripsit

"Edward Green" <spamspamspam3@netzero.com> wrote:

It's amazing how children can pump swings, while drawing a force
diagram explaining how they do it might challenge bright freshman
physicists. Of course the Earth and gravity are the other side of the
equation for conserving angular momentum, just as for a pendulum. But
I've never gone through the exercise of understanding how it is
possible for a person dangling in the seat to pump it up in the first
place.

I was never able to do that; I always needed a jump start.

But you were able to pump up the oscillation once it got started,
right?
That's an interesting observation. I had tried (and failed) to
construct a good explanation based on moving one's center of mass
_perpendicular_ to the rope. But once the oscillation has been set up
here is a possible model for pumping by movement _along_ the rope's
direction:
At the bottom of each swing you pull up your legs, doing work against
gravity *plus* work against the centrifugal force; the latter
component will increase your angular velocity by preservation of
angular momentum. At each dead-point let the legs fall down; this only
returns energy from gravity.
As far as I remember, what I actually did back when I was a
kid-on-a-swing was that during the (last half of the) forward swing I
would have my legs stretched out in front of me. At the front deadpoint
I would *begin* bending the knees such that my heels hit the underside
of the seat at the bottom of the back swing, and at the back deadpoint
I would similarly *begin* streching my legs again.
I always thought that this technique worked by moving my
center-of-mass backwards and forwards, but that can't really be true -
in the direction perpendicular to the rope all I should be able to do
was to change the _distribution_ of my mass around a smoothly
oscillating center, which would have no effect.
What the technique _did_ achieve was to _lower_ my center of mass
briefly during the downward half of each half-swing. Since the angular
velocity was lower during the lowrering of the feet than during the
raising, energy would be pumped into the oscillation.
--
Henning Makholm "Okay, okay, life's a beach."
.
User: ""

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 07 Jun 2006 08:10:07 AM
In article <87ac8q5cnd.fsf@kreon.lan.henning.makholm.net>,
Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net> wrote:

Scripsit


"Edward Green" <spamspamspam3@netzero.com> wrote:


It's amazing how children can pump swings, while drawing a force
diagram explaining how they do it might challenge bright freshman
physicists. Of course the Earth and gravity are the other side of the
equation for conserving angular momentum, just as for a pendulum. But
I've never gone through the exercise of understanding how it is
possible for a person dangling in the seat to pump it up in the first
place.


I was never able to do that; I always needed a jump start.


But you were able to pump up the oscillation once it got started,
right?

That's an interesting observation. I had tried (and failed) to
construct a good explanation based on moving one's center of mass
_perpendicular_ to the rope. But once the oscillation has been set up
here is a possible model for pumping by movement _along_ the rope's
direction:

At the bottom of each swing you pull up your legs, doing work against
gravity *plus* work against the centrifugal force; the latter
component will increase your angular velocity by preservation of
angular momentum. At each dead-point let the legs fall down; this only
returns energy from gravity.

As far as I remember, what I actually did back when I was a
kid-on-a-swing was that during the (last half of the) forward swing I
would have my legs stretched out in front of me. At the front deadpoint
I would *begin* bending the knees such that my heels hit the underside
of the seat at the bottom of the back swing, and at the back deadpoint
I would similarly *begin* streching my legs again.

I always thought that this technique worked by moving my
center-of-mass backwards and forwards,

I assume your backwards and forwards is defined to be horizontal
to the rope.
My suggesting about moving the CoM was vertical w.r.t. the
rope--up and down. But I don't know what I'm talking about..usually.

but that can't really be true -
in the direction perpendicular to the rope all I should be able to do
was to change the _distribution_ of my mass around a smoothly
oscillating center, which would have no effect.

What the technique _did_ achieve was to _lower_ my center of mass
briefly during the downward half of each half-swing. Since the angular
velocity was lower during the lowrering of the feet than during the
raising, energy would be pumped into the oscillation.

Oh, you say it. Up and down. That must somehow get a
pendulum started. I wonder...can you do the same
trick if the rope is not "elastic".
My dad built something that he called a scooter on our
swing set which had a rigid pipe. To get it two move
two of us sat in each seat and took turns pushing on
the peddles with our feet to get it to swing.
/BAH
.
User: "Henning Makholm"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 07 Jun 2006 02:54:16 PM
Scripsit

Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net> wrote:

I always thought that this technique worked by moving my
center-of-mass backwards and forwards,

I assume your backwards and forwards is defined to be horizontal
to the rope.

Yes. I got tired of qualifying every time and hoped that the readers
would understand this implicitly.

What the technique _did_ achieve was to _lower_ my center of mass
briefly during the downward half of each half-swing. Since the angular
velocity was lower during the lowrering of the feet than during the
raising, energy would be pumped into the oscillation.

Oh, you say it. Up and down. That must somehow get a
pendulum started. I wonder...can you do the same
trick if the rope is not "elastic".

I don't think my explanation depends on elasticity of the _rope_.
Hmm... here is another variant: You sit on the swing, immobile
vertically below the bearing. Hold on to the ropes at breast height.
Now all of a sudden, and still holding the ropes, thrust your arms
forward. In the long run all this is going to do is push your body
backwards, but said body has inertia, so on order to get the body
going you need to briefly apply a horizontal force to the ropes.
Therfore, for a brief time, the hand/rope join is going to be a bit
_forward_ of the bearing. There will be a slight horizontal component
to the pull in the rope, which will send your center-of-mass moving
backwards.
Thus an oscillation has been started. Sooner or later you'll need to
start pulling on the rope in order to stop your body's backwards
movement, but if you time things appropriately you can make that
happen at the point in the nascent oscillation where a slight
acceleation forwards will help pump it up.

My dad built something that he called a scooter on our
swing set which had a rigid pipe. To get it two move
two of us sat in each seat and took turns pushing on
the peddles with our feet to get it to swing.

That construction has a parallelogram in it, right? In that case
getting things to move is of course, from a theoretical viewpoint,
easy.
--
Henning Makholm "Punctuation, is? fun!"
.
User: "CWatters"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 08 Jun 2006 10:34:01 AM
"Henning Makholm" <henning@makholm.net> wrote in message
news:878xo8d9nb.fsf@kreon.lan.henning.makholm.net...


Hmm... here is another variant: You sit on the swing, immobile
vertically below the bearing. Hold on to the ropes at breast height.

Now all of a sudden, and still holding the ropes, thrust your arms
forward.

This is on the right lines I think but what about rotating your arms as if
doing the butterfly stroke. That rotation will be countered by your body
trying to rotate the other way about your center of mass. That's going to
make the swing move.
.
User: ""

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 08 Jun 2006 11:31:47 AM
In article <4488436c$0$22879$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net>, "CWatters" <colin.watters@turnersNOSPAMoak.plus.net> writes:


"Henning Makholm" <henning@makholm.net> wrote in message
news:878xo8d9nb.fsf@kreon.lan.henning.makholm.net...


Hmm... here is another variant: You sit on the swing, immobile
vertically below the bearing. Hold on to the ropes at breast height.

Now all of a sudden, and still holding the ropes, thrust your arms
forward.


This is on the right lines I think but what about rotating your arms as if
doing the butterfly stroke. That rotation will be countered by your body
trying to rotate the other way about your center of mass. That's going to
make the swing move.

Which way do you think it will make the swing move? And why?
I would suggest that it depends on whether the seat of the swing is
above or below the axis around which your body rotates as a result of
your arms windmilling.
Naively, you would expect the swing seat to be below your center of
gravity. [So if you windmill forward your body will rotate backward
and your seat will move forward]. The net effect is to force your
attachment point to the swing forward, just as if you'd thrust
with your arms.
However, I think you'll find that this is an unstable equilibrium.
If you let go of the ropes and windmill your arms so that the seat
goes forward, it will very quickly wind up higher than your
center of gravity.
If you move the point of attachment to the ropes up above your
center of gravity to achieve a more stable arrangement, you should
discover that what you are proposing is essentially identical to what
Henning has already proposed.
.
User: "CWatters"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 09 Jun 2006 05:24:56 AM
<briggs@encompasserve.org> wrote in message
news:PQPf2hvtchmK@eisner.encompasserve.org...

In article <4488436c$0$22879$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net>,

"CWatters" <colin.watters@turnersNOSPAMoak.plus.net> writes:


However, I think you'll find that this is an unstable equilibrium.
If you let go of the ropes and windmill your arms so that the seat
goes forward, it will very quickly wind up higher than your
center of gravity.

LOL
Try it with your legs then. Obviously not a full revolution though!
.



User: ""

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 10 Jun 2006 04:50:14 AM
In article <878xo8d9nb.fsf@kreon.lan.henning.makholm.net>,
Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net> wrote:

Scripsit


Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net> wrote:


I always thought that this technique worked by moving my
center-of-mass backwards and forwards,


I assume your backwards and forwards is defined to be horizontal
to the rope.


Yes. I got tired of qualifying every time and hoped that the readers
would understand this implicitly.

I understand. I was just making sure; I've not been writing
clearly lately.


What the technique _did_ achieve was to _lower_ my center of mass
briefly during the downward half of each half-swing. Since the angular
velocity was lower during the lowrering of the feet than during the
raising, energy would be pumped into the oscillation.


Oh, you say it. Up and down. That must somehow get a
pendulum started. I wonder...can you do the same
trick if the rope is not "elastic".


I don't think my explanation depends on elasticity of the _rope_.

I was thinking about the technique (remember I never was able
to this from a standing start) with a rigid rope. It seemed
to me that getting the rope to start swinging was the key.
Then I figured that the rope "bending forward" helped a lot
because the rest of the mass (which is your butt) had to
follow the rope.


Hmm... here is another variant: You sit on the swing, immobile
vertically below the bearing. Hold on to the ropes at breast height.

Now all of a sudden, and still holding the ropes, thrust your arms
forward. In the long run all this is going to do is push your body
backwards, but said body has inertia, so on order to get the body
going you need to briefly apply a horizontal force to the ropes.
Therfore, for a brief time, the hand/rope join is going to be a bit
_forward_ of the bearing. There will be a slight horizontal component
to the pull in the rope, which will send your center-of-mass moving
backwards.

Thus an oscillation has been started. Sooner or later you'll need to
start pulling on the rope in order to stop your body's backwards
movement, but if you time things appropriately you can make that
happen at the point in the nascent oscillation where a slight
acceleation forwards will help pump it up.

That can do it, I think. But the timing has to be exactly right.
That's another piece of the problem. Does the boost timing
have to lag or anticipate the change of [what is it?] acceleration
when the swing switches directions.


My dad built something that he called a scooter on our
swing set which had a rigid pipe. To get it two move
two of us sat in each seat and took turns pushing on
the peddles with our feet to get it to swing.


That construction has a parallelogram in it, right?

Right.

In that case
getting things to move is of course, from a theoretical viewpoint,
easy.

That could be another analysis problem for the kiddies. Why
would a parallelogram make it easier? Can this ease be
extrapolated to 3-D? n-D?
Note that I have no idea what I'm talking about. I'm just
using my old paranoid computer designing what-ifs to try to cover all
possibilities.
And WTF is going on with this newsgroup? Was there a clemency
edict that let all the kooks out of their padded cells? 834
unread posts. Sheesh!
/BAH
/BAH
.
User: ""

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 11 Jun 2006 02:13:09 PM
In article <87k67ovuee.fsf@kreon.lan.henning.makholm.net>, Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net> writes:

Scripsit


Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net> wrote:

Scripsit



Thus an oscillation has been started. Sooner or later you'll need to
start pulling on the rope in order to stop your body's backwards
movement, but if you time things appropriately you can make that
happen at the point in the nascent oscillation where a slight
acceleation forwards will help pump it up.


That can do it, I think. But the timing has to be exactly right.


No, it just has to be approximately okay. Once we have shown that you
can indeed cause a lateral force on the swing, all you have to do is
to repeat the operation periodically with a frequency close to the
swing's natural one. Then the glorious phenomenon of resonance will
eventually build up enough of an oscillation that you can start using
a better technique.

It helps that it is fairly easy to tune in to the natural frequency
once some movement has started - just make sure you're doing work all
the time. When the rope comes towards you, pull on it, and when it
recedes, push it.

My dad built something that he called a scooter on our
swing set which had a rigid pipe. To get it two move
two of us sat in each seat and took turns pushing on
the peddles with our feet to get it to swing.


That construction has a parallelogram in it, right?
In that case getting things to move is of course, from a
theoretical viewpoint, easy.


That could be another analysis problem for the kiddies. Why
would a parallelogram make it easier?


Because in the parallelogram, the angle between the two rigid bars at
any linkage point determines the shape of the entire figure, and thus
the spatial position of the swing. There is a one-one correspondence
between the position of the pedals (at the end of one of the the
vertical pipe) and the seat (at the end of the horizontal one). If you
were strong enough you would be able to move yourself to an elevated
position _and stay there_ just by putting enough force between seat
and pedal.

And WTF is going on with this newsgroup? Was there a clemency
edict that let all the kooks out of their padded cells? 834
unread posts. Sheesh!


Isn't that just the usual state of disorder? I seldom have more than
about a percent of the new articles left after my killfile has weeded
out among them.

(Also, the kook problem in and of itself would be managegable if not
for the legion of self-proclaimed defenders of physics who think there
is value in replying to every kook post with a pure insult that does
not even try to relate to the underlying physical claims).

Yes, exactly.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
.

User: "Henning Makholm"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 11 Jun 2006 05:50:01 AM
Scripsit

Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net> wrote:

Scripsit


Thus an oscillation has been started. Sooner or later you'll need to
start pulling on the rope in order to stop your body's backwards
movement, but if you time things appropriately you can make that
happen at the point in the nascent oscillation where a slight
acceleation forwards will help pump it up.

That can do it, I think. But the timing has to be exactly right.

No, it just has to be approximately okay. Once we have shown that you
can indeed cause a lateral force on the swing, all you have to do is
to repeat the operation periodically with a frequency close to the
swing's natural one. Then the glorious phenomenon of resonance will
eventually build up enough of an oscillation that you can start using
a better technique.
It helps that it is fairly easy to tune in to the natural frequency
once some movement has started - just make sure you're doing work all
the time. When the rope comes towards you, pull on it, and when it
recedes, push it.

My dad built something that he called a scooter on our
swing set which had a rigid pipe. To get it two move
two of us sat in each seat and took turns pushing on
the peddles with our feet to get it to swing.

That construction has a parallelogram in it, right?
In that case getting things to move is of course, from a
theoretical viewpoint, easy.

That could be another analysis problem for the kiddies. Why
would a parallelogram make it easier?

Because in the parallelogram, the angle between the two rigid bars at
any linkage point determines the shape of the entire figure, and thus
the spatial position of the swing. There is a one-one correspondence
between the position of the pedals (at the end of one of the the
vertical pipe) and the seat (at the end of the horizontal one). If you
were strong enough you would be able to move yourself to an elevated
position _and stay there_ just by putting enough force between seat
and pedal.

And WTF is going on with this newsgroup? Was there a clemency
edict that let all the kooks out of their padded cells? 834
unread posts. Sheesh!

Isn't that just the usual state of disorder? I seldom have more than
about a percent of the new articles left after my killfile has weeded
out among them.
(Also, the kook problem in and of itself would be managegable if not
for the legion of self-proclaimed defenders of physics who think there
is value in replying to every kook post with a pure insult that does
not even try to relate to the underlying physical claims).
--
Henning Makholm "I have something I use for
one. It serves my simple purposes."
.
User: "Edward Green"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 11 Jun 2006 09:34:01 PM
Henning Makholm wrote:

Scripsit

<...>

And WTF is going on with this newsgroup? Was there a clemency
edict that let all the kooks out of their padded cells? 834
unread posts. Sheesh!


Isn't that just the usual state of disorder? I seldom have more than
about a percent of the new articles left after my killfile has weeded
out among them.

What technology are you using? Maybe I'd like to try it.

(Also, the kook problem in and of itself would be managegable if not
for the legion of self-proclaimed defenders of physics who think there
is value in replying to every kook post with a pure insult that does
not even try to relate to the underlying physical claims).

You have hit that one dead on, like a laser guided bomb.
.
User: "Henning Makholm"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 13 Jun 2006 07:45:23 AM
Scripsit "Edward Green" <spamspamspam3@netzero.com>

Henning Makholm wrote:

Isn't that just the usual state of disorder? I seldom have more than
about a percent of the new articles left after my killfile has weeded
out among them.

What technology are you using? Maybe I'd like to try it.

"About a percent" was probably an overstatement. I use Gnus plus
liberal downscoring of certain posters, _replies_ to certain posters,
and subthreads I can see are going nowhere interesting.
--
Henning Makholm "De kan rejse hid og did i verden nok så flot
Og er helt fortrolig med alverdens militær"
.
User: "Edward Green"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 13 Jun 2006 05:48:56 PM
Henning Makholm wrote:

Scripsit "Edward Green" <spamspamspam3@netzero.com>

Henning Makholm wrote:


Isn't that just the usual state of disorder? I seldom have more than
about a percent of the new articles left after my killfile has weeded
out among them.


What technology are you using? Maybe I'd like to try it.


"About a percent" was probably an overstatement. I use Gnus...

Sorry to be so persistently ignorant, but about the most I can say
about "Gnu" is that I've heard of it, and associated the word with some
sect of free software. Can you be just a tad more explicit? Is this
something that runs under Linux, or Unix, or what? Is it something
that looks like windows, or are you living in the world of pure text?
Can end users of ordinary skill in the art operate it? :-)
.
User: "Henning Makholm"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 14 Jun 2006 09:26:58 AM
Scripsit "Edward Green" <spamspamspam3@netzero.com>

Henning Makholm wrote:

Scripsit "Edward Green" <spamspamspam3@netzero.com>

What technology are you using? Maybe I'd like to try it.

"About a percent" was probably an overstatement. I use Gnus...

Sorry to be so persistently ignorant, but about the most I can say
about "Gnu" is that I've heard of it, and associated the word with some
sect of free software. Can you be just a tad more explicit?

Gnus is a newsreading application written to run as a set of macros in
the text-editor-become-kitchen-sink Emacs. These days it is actually
distributed _with_ releases of Emacs, which is available in a Windows
port as well as for Unices.

Is it something that looks like windows, or are you living in the
world of pure text?

Usenet _is_ a world of pure text. :-)
Recent versions have some graphic capabilities if Emacs is run in its
GUI mode (for example, they seem to display emoticons as little yellow
smiling faces), but I don't know much about that. I usually ssh to my
server and run emacs/gnus in an terminal window.

Can end users of ordinary skill in the art operate it? :-)

There is a rather steep learning curve, I'm afraid.
Emacs and Emacs applications generally follow a philosophy that
emphasizes few-keypress command sequences over beginner-friendly
menu systems. There is a menu system in newer releases, but I don't
know how extensive it is for Gnus. Real Programmers see the menu
line as a waste of valuable monitor space and turn it off in the
configuration file.
--
Henning Makholm "Jeg har tydeligt gjort opmærksom på, at man ved at
følge den vej kun bliver gennemsnitligt ca. 48 år gammel,
og at man sætter sin sociale situation ganske overstyr og, så
vidt jeg kan overskue, dør i dybeste ulykkelighed og elendighed."
.
User: "Edward Green"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 15 Jun 2006 07:43:22 PM
Henning Makholm wrote:
<...>

Emacs and Emacs applications generally follow a philosophy that
emphasizes few-keypress command sequences over beginner-friendly
menu systems. There is a menu system in newer releases, but I don't
know how extensive it is for Gnus. Real Programmers see the menu
line as a waste of valuable monitor space and turn it off in the
configuration file.

Well, at one time I had mastered, was even fluent in, that quirky
little line editor whose name escapes me, but which a well known series
of books personified as a small primate. At one time, I say. All I
used it for was to write USENET posts in a terminal enviroment. I am
not a programmer.
Thanks for the details.
.

User: "Bill_Vajk"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 08 Jul 2006 12:37:49 AM
Henning Makholm wrote:

Emacs and Emacs applications generally follow a philosophy that
emphasizes few-keypress command sequences over beginner-friendly
menu systems. There is a menu system in newer releases, but I don't
know how extensive it is for Gnus. Real Programmers see the menu
line as a waste of valuable monitor space and turn it off in the
configuration file.

Real programmers use cat. LOL
Just slumming this evening.....
.
User: "Ben Rudiak-Gould"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 08 Jul 2006 03:50:52 PM
Bill_Vajk wrote:

Real programmers use cat. LOL

Real programmers don't say "LOL".
-- Ben
.


User: ""

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 16 Jun 2006 05:47:12 AM
In article <87u06nn77x.fsf@kreon.lan.henning.makholm.net>,
Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net> wrote:

Scripsit "Edward Green" <spamspamspam3@netzero.com>

Henning Makholm wrote:

<snip>

Can end users of ordinary skill in the art operate it? :-)


There is a rather steep learning curve, I'm afraid.

Emacs and Emacs applications generally follow a philosophy that
emphasizes few-keypress command sequences over beginner-friendly
menu systems.

<snort> It is too verbose.
<snip>
/BAH
.











User: "Henning Makholm"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 05 Jun 2006 09:07:43 AM
Scripsit "Edward Green" <spamspamspam3@netzero.com>

Related playground question: how can a child standing in the middle of
a turntable, not touching anything else, make it rotate?

Friction in the bearing allows it to transmit a small torque to the
turntable. The child starts turning her torso with a torque that it
small enough to be countered by the turntable, then suddenly reverses
her rotation with a large torque in the opposite direction. The large
torque overcomes the friction and the turntable begins to rotate.
I don't think that the trick will work a second time once the
turntable does rotate. It depends on non-linearity of the friction.
--
Henning Makholm "Gå ud i solen eller regnen, smil, køb en ny trøje,
slå en sludder af med købmanden, puds dine støvler. Lev!"
.
User: "Edward Green"

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 10 Jun 2006 11:39:45 AM
Henning Makholm wrote:

Scripsit "Edward Green" <spamspamspam3@netzero.com>

Related playground question: how can a child standing in the middle of
a turntable, not touching anything else, make it rotate?


Friction in the bearing allows it to transmit a small torque to the
turntable. The child starts turning her torso with a torque that it
small enough to be countered by the turntable, then suddenly reverses
her rotation with a large torque in the opposite direction. The large
torque overcomes the friction and the turntable begins to rotate.

I don't think that the trick will work a second time once the
turntable does rotate. It depends on non-linearity of the friction.

Thank you for the answer, but not the answer I was looking for.
The child can make the turntable rotate even assuming a frictionless
bearing, even have a time averaged non-zero rate of rotation, although
he cannot put it into a steady state rotation. He does this by first
twisting one way then twisting back, having altered his moment of
inertia in the interim by extending or dropping his arms. The net
result will be a repeatable re-orientation of turntable + child. Of
course the net angular momentum, if zero at the first, must remain
zero: the point is, deformable bodies can reorient in the absence of
external torques.
You could say it was a trick question.
.
User: ""

Title: Re: Swing and momentum 10 Jun 2006 03:15:53 PM
In article <1149957584.980054.25930@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, "Edward Green" <spamspamspam3@netzero.com> writes:

Henning Makholm wrote:

Scripsit "Edward Green" <spamspamspam3@netzero.com>

Related playground question: how can a child standing in the middle of
a turntable, not touching anything else, make it rotate?


Friction in the bearing allows it to transmit a small torque to the
turntable. The child starts turning her torso with a torque that it
small enough to be countered by the turntable, then suddenly reverses
her rotation with a large torque in the opposite direction. The large
torque overcomes the friction and the turntable begins to rotate.

I don't think that the trick will work a second time once the
turntable does rotate. It depends on non-linearity of the friction.


Thank you for the answer, but not the answer I was looking for.

The child can make the turntable rotate even assuming a frictionless
bearing, even have a time averaged non-zero rate of rotation, although
he cannot put it into a steady state rotation. He does this by first
twisting one way then twisting back, having altered his moment of
inertia in the interim by extending or dropping his arms. The net
result will be a repeatable re-orientation of turntable + child. Of
course the net angular momentum, if zero at the first, must remain
zero: the point is, deformable bodies can reorient in the absence of
external torques.

Sure, how do you think you do precision orintational positioning of
satellites.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
.






  Page 1 of 2

1

 

2

 


Related Articles
 

NEWER

pg.1612     pg.1232     pg.940     pg.716     pg.544     pg.412     pg.311     pg.234     pg.175     pg.130     pg.96     pg.70     pg.50     pg.35     pg.24     pg.16     pg.10     pg.6     pg.3     pg.1

OLDER